When I compared Lamine Yamal and Michael Olise, a lot of people insulted me without understanding the actual point. Olise is a calculated player. He picks his moments, manages risk and usually plays within his rhythm. Yamal can do that too, but he can also become a force of nature. He can go directly at defenders, force the issue and make an entire defence uncomfortable. That versatility is what separates them for me. You can see it with Spain too. Yamal plays more controlled because De la Fuente’s Spain prioritises control and possession. At Barcelona under Flick, he gets more freedom to express himself and attack aggressively. Olise doesn’t really have that same explosive gear. He can explode when the game demands it, but his natural game is more calculated. Against Italy, France needed someone who could relentlessly attack the defence and force something to happen. Olise kept dropping deep and trying to orchestrate instead. That’s why I say Yamal is more efficient. Yamal can give you what Olise gives you and then add another dimension. Olise can’t consistently give you what Yamal gives you. In terms of pure quality, they’re comparable and you can make arguments for either. But in terms of versatility and efficiency, I’m taking Yamal.