QuincyAbeyie Havertz and Trossard are options too. And I don't mean Havertz in the role he's taken previously in midfield for us but as a more offensive role. This could be a viable option because while Havertz is not as good as Odegaard on the ball, his pressing is elite and he could be as effective off the ball - in that sense we get to a halfway house compromise position. You've got to make it work - City played Alvarez at number 10 for some games when KBD was out and he wouldn't have been the like for like replacement but they tweaked how they played and it worked.

For what it's worth, the real cast iron insurance policy to cover Odegaard or Saka getting injured is to have another elite player for our front three (most likely left wing) so that it takes the pressure off the replacements.

Mirth 13 goals scored as a 10, 5 as RW. Doesn't really change that their situation for dealing with KDB's absence is different from ours in Ødegaard's. Moving Havertz would mean moving our starting striker - Alvarez isn't theirs so they wouldn't have to move him around. So I guess the similarities would be between Trossard and Alvarez, which to me just tells me how much easier it would be for City than us.

QuincyAbeyie yep, City have a deeper squad and can pretty much cover any injury crisis so KDB's example is illustrative of the strategy that another top manager uses when one of his key players gets injured rather than the specifics of tactics. We are not as well equipped as City to deal with a loss of key personnel.

The original claim was that the way to address Odegaard's injury would be to have an Odegaard-lite on the bench and play more or less the same way and hope that works. That's not how top club's approach that challenge, you need to redesign your system to rebalance away from your weakness and towards your strengths.