Unai Emery
Aston Villa manager Unai Emery has made some intriguing tactical decisions regarding midfielder Harvey Elliott, who has seen limited playing time since joining the club. Despite a £35 million obligation to sign him, Elliott has only made five appearances, starting twice. Recently, he was left on the bench against Burnley, Tottenham, and Go Ahead Eagles, and was excluded from the squad entirely for the match against Manchester City.
Unai Emery said: “I am being very, very demanding myself to choose in each match the player to start and the players on the bench and the subs players, and firstly is always trying to get the best performance collectively, through individual players. Harvey is a 10 number in our structure, in our shape, and he plays some matches and there is still adaptation to add himself individually in our structure, the task we have. At the same time, we have other players who can play as a 10 and they are performing well, and I have different players. This is the main reason he is not playing the last matches minutes, but he has to continue working like he is doing in the training session and of course getting his confidence in the performance we need through him.”
Emery added: “His quality, in my opinion, is to play No 10. He can maybe play wide right, like John McGinn, but he will need more time. At the beginning I signed him thinking him to play No 10 and getting the performance and getting him to play consistently for us. There are other players who can play there.”
The situation has sparked discussions among fans and pundits, with some speculating that Emery’s decision not to play Elliott could be linked to a contractual appearance clause. During a Claret & Blue Q&A session, Dan Rolinson and John Townley addressed a conspiracy theory suggesting Emery is deliberately keeping Elliott from reaching his 10th appearance to avoid triggering a payment clause before the end of the year.
John Townley explained: “Unai Emery essentially said he had to leave one player out of the squad because he wanted a more balanced bench, with coverage across different positions. So, you’ve got players like Lindelof and Maatsen included to offer that squad balance. Emery has mentioned several times that while others see Elliott as a midfielder or winger, he views him primarily as a number 10 – that’s where he believes he can best use his qualities. He’s versatile – able to play off the right, through the middle, or even a bit deeper if needed. Emery often talks about valuing players who can fill multiple roles, so this decision feels a little inconsistent with that philosophy.”
Townley continued: “Elliott wasn’t omitted due to injury or illness – just tactical preference. With nine spots available on the bench, it’s surprising that he didn’t make it, and he can’t play this weekend either. That brings us closer to the conspiracy that Emery could be looking to avoid the appearance clause.”
The lack of clarity surrounding the payment clause has fueled speculation. If the clause is payable before January, delaying Elliott’s appearances could be financially beneficial for Villa. Emery’s handling of Elliott contrasts with his treatment of other fringe players, suggesting that Elliott is still part of his long-term plans. However, without more information on the payment clause, questions remain about Elliott’s absence from the squad.
As Villa continues to perform well, the issue has not dominated discussions. However, if Elliott remains sidelined after the international break, speculation will likely intensify, potentially revealing more about the terms of his deal and Emery’s tactical decisions.
About The Author
