They all started with him, when he was injured, when he has needed a rest. And as they are understudy/back up - they wont have had excessive chances anyway.
As did Lamela alongside Eriksen whenever he was fit. He didn't get excessive chances either as he was needed in the first team himself every week.
Point being though - chances they all had.
Lamela? Barely a sniff. When Eriksen is injured? No.
Explain please - when was Eriksen injured and Lamela not used?
When Eriksen needs a break? No.
Like in early EL/domestic cup games? You do realise as a starter himself (and someone clearly more prone to injuries) Lamela also would have needed resting - maybe more so than Eriksen as his role in the team was much more physical...
And I dont buy its because he had the right side sewn up so couldnt be moved. We have had right sided options both good enough to play and desperate to prove themselves there as well.
Son being the only one of any quality and even he didnt oust Lamela from his starting position the year he signed (nor the start of the following season)
We have never had real cover for Eriksen.
Yes we did, he was just also a starter and with Eriksen being freakishly fit cover is rarely needed - i find it strange that since Eriksen and Lamela joined the club we never signed another creative attacking midfielder nor were ever really strongly linked to one - almost as though the manager thinks we were covered.
Surely, if it was in Pochs thoughts, he would have found opportunities to test it out?
Like in-game during 15/16 when the front 4 would rotate and swap roles throughout the game? Quite often you'd see Eriksen popping up on the wing attacking the box and Lamela deep/central
