Dec 21

Stats which prove Cazorla is playing better than Mata and Silva

Controversial talkSPORT pundit Adrian Durham said in his Daily Mail column this week that Arsenal’s Santi Cazorla ‘cannot touch’ fellow Spanish midfielders’ Juan Mata or David Silva.

However, statistics from the Premier League season so far suggest summer signing Cazorla is ahead of both his compatriots in terms of passing accuracy, goals and average passes.

Cazorla, who joined the Gunners’ for around £16 million from Malaga in August, already has an impressive 88.3 per cent passing success rate in his first season in English football.

“Santi Cazorla is good, but over the course of a season he’s not quite David Silva, or Juan Mata”, claimed outspoken Durham.

cazorla

Infographic courtesy of WhoScored?

Share

31 Responses to “Stats which prove Cazorla is playing better than Mata and Silva”

  1. Return of the Egg says:

    Over the course of a season he still won’t cost half what Mata and Silva would. He’s a cracking little player and Adrian Durham is an ugly, yellow toothed c**t.

    ReplyReply
  2. Arse&Nose© says:

    According to ‘Who scored?’ ,who get their stats from OPTA,

    Carzola is the best player in the league by a decent margin.

    The 2nd best is RVP

    ReplyReply
  3. Lloyd says:

    There is no denying Cazorla is a phenomenal player, but mata has 2 more assists and and just one less goal in 3 fewer games. Considering he is the youngest out of the three and has for many parts been amongst other players who do many similar things, instead of having this position to himself, he is in my mind clearly better.

    ReplyReply
  4. Lloyd says:

    also, mata has to attempt to feed torres all the time, who is completely and utterly useless.

    ReplyReply
  5. JK says:

    Aaaaaaaaand yet Arsenal are doing S***! Mata has been one of the key players of the season and overall is much better than Carzola who is only shining in a team of sub-par Arsenal.

    ReplyReply
  6. flex says:

    santi is more far better than mata n co.

    ReplyReply
  7. flex says:

    santi is dey best

    ReplyReply
  8. Sebastian says:

    I think it would be fair to say they are all in the same bracket, however I do feel that Silva and Cazorla are slightly more creative than Mata, but Mata is younger. It certainly isn’t fair to say that Cazorla “cannot touch” the other 2, what a stupid comment from a well known Arsenal hater. I’m abit embarrassed for him.

    ReplyReply
  9. Lawrence says:

    As much as i like to listen to talksport when going to work in the morning and going back in the evening, most of the presenter most especially motor mouth Adrian are egoistic.

    I don’t know if they hate anything Arsenal or they just don’t like Arsene Wenger.

    I hope in some way Arsenal proof them wrong this year.

    ReplyReply
  10. Zane says:

    Santi Carzola is good but definitely not better than Mata. In the game between their respective teams,Mata completely outshined Carzola. Mata is a game changer,no matter who the opposition. Arsenal is an overall passing side (no wonder why Barcelona always want to harvest from them) so his passing stats might look better but most of it with no end result. At Chelsea they play a dynamic direct style and Mata,alongside the other two amigos, (Oscar and Hazard) are there to bring creativity and technical ability into the final third. Carzola can’t touch Mata.

    ReplyReply
  11. geoff1948 says:

    you just any Chelsea fan if they would swop Mata for Carzola and I know what the answer would be.

    ReplyReply
  12. beje says:

    Adrian Durham don’t know the real football only he knows is from playstation fifa. Santi’s first year and he etablest himself as a talesman for Arsenal. Mata and Silva playing 2nd season for EPL Santi’s first year he looks like he plays more than 5 years.

    ReplyReply
  13. Wale says:

    Only time wil tell, nt Durham

    ReplyReply
  14. gee says:

    @Lloyd:

    Well you could say that Carzola is playing in a less talented team than Chelsea ( how much hazzard cost, feeding a 50 million pounds torres as opposed to Gervinio) and its easier to play surrounded by better players than it is where you have to carry everyone – RVP looks like he is strolling in the park these days, Messi has not reproduced Barca form for Argentina.

    All i can say is out of all of them Carzola catches the eye when on form more than the other 2 as he has slightly more to his game.

    ReplyReply
  15. Dale says:

    The better player gets more playing time on Spain’s national team, Carzola for sure

    ReplyReply
  16. femi says:

    carzola is better dan two of dem ,u should not judge them sentimentally base on d club they are playing 4 .there are some player in relegated team dat are better than so called in big four.carzola is d best among them

    ReplyReply
  17. Wyclif says:

    How many assits is Cazorla denied becoz of the finishing inabilities of the crapic forward line?

    ReplyReply
  18. Laplace says:

    Cazorla is TWO-FOOTED,mata and silva aren’t!

    ReplyReply
  19. Zane says:

    Think of it this way. Arsenal likes to play possession football. Their players look to make them available to recieve a pass most of the time. At Chelsea,their players look to run into open space and recieve passes through and behind defenders. Obviously Carzola will have a better pass ratio when players are close by to support him. That doesn’t mean he is better than Mata. Like I said before,Mata is a game changer. Something Carzola is not. Mata basically carried the Chelsea midfield last term in his debut season to two cups. At Arsenal you have Wilshere who is a phenomenal asset in the holding playmaker role,Carzola just ahead of him in the hole,Podolski wide left and Walcott or Gervinho right wing. Arsenal’s problem is they don’t have power/strength in the midfield with Diaby being injury prone and barely plays. That attack is good enough to cause any team in the world problems when you think of the creativity,pace and ofcourse the passing play. I just feel the team isn’t used properly. Now when you look at Chelsea,they basically only rely on MAZACAR to pass the ball around and create changes. There isn’t someone like a Wilshere or Arteta to make accurate passes from deep. Overall,the Arsenal midfield is better but not used to full effect in my opinion. Mata is better than Carzola because he plays with limited players with similar ability and still stand out week in week out above his compatriot.

    ReplyReply
  20. docbrody says:

    they’re both great players

    ReplyReply
  21. aryour says:

    The fewer games mate has played makes his stats look good. The more u play d less ur chances on the average

    ReplyReply
  22. JK says:

    @flex:

    Why do people have to speak like retards. It is the same amount of letters and time to write ‘the’ rather than ‘dey’

    ReplyReply
  23. @Arse&Nose©: if u want to know more about santi,pls recall asenal against man city.simply d best.

    ReplyReply
  24. santi is d best.

    ReplyReply
  25. henry says:

    two fantastic players with the usual spanish touch but with different vision due to the style of play adopted by their teams

    ReplyReply
  26. Banks says:

    oooooh santi cazorla,cazorla’s technical ability is next to none,not even xavi,only iniesta can match it

    ReplyReply
  27. Haykay says:

    Well, I think Matta is better going by the statistic and considering the fact that he played less, but you have to remember that Carzola is playing in his first season in the EPL, while Matta had played one more, Carzola would have been a better player if we have got better strikers.

    ReplyReply
  28. kgun says:

    zane, carzola is not a game changer? did you see him play for malaga last season? please attempt to use your brain before speaking. ok stum-sta-stiddely-stum-sta-ster

    ReplyReply
  29. kgun says:

    and in your mind, what constitutes being a game changer?

    ReplyReply
  30. Zane says:

    Malaga is in a league where two teams are dominant and the rest are average with unknown players. I’ll give credit to Valencia and Athletico Madrid though but that league isn’t as competitive as the Premier League. If Mata played in La Liga now,he would probably lead in overall assists and would have more goals than he has now. A game changer is a player who changes the tempo and mood of a game. When John Terry or Vidic are playing for their respective clubs,the defense is organised and there’s stability. Now look at Mata. When he is in the mood,the team press better,they keep the ball better,passing is fluid between him and those who attack with him-ultimately he dictates what happens in the final third. When Chelsea were 2 down against United,he stepped up and you could see how he changed that game. Everything went through him. In quick succession they were level again because of him. Carzola doesn’t get the same attention as Mata and it’s obvious why. Carzola is a good player but most of the time a headless chicken running around trying to be creative with no end result. As simple as that,he can’t touch Akuna Matata. Watch these players closely and stop being biased you idiot.

    ReplyReply
  31. Pat says:

    @Lloyd: And Cazorla has to feed Giroud and Gervinho. Torres better than both of them.

    ReplyReply

Leave a Reply