His positional sense is what made up for his lack of pace and the reason he was so good last year. If he didn't have that positional sense with his lack of PACe he'd have nothing
Totally untrue. That's just a vague excuse commonly used for players who don't have any pace. I cannot belive that even Billy Jones' wikipedia page says that his positonal sense makes up for his lack of pace. And nor am I a hater of McAuley, not once did I say we MUST replece him, just I said that Dawson is better than him.
He does not have a good positinal sense and I've given examples as to where I have seen this even though I see it practically every game I watch. He often makes up for these postional errors with his height and tackling ability. Now here is a praise for him: he is the best tackler in our starting xi.
Overall, I beleive that Hodgson knew that Dawson was better but played McAuley next to Olsson because they both fit very well together: Olsson adds physical prescence, height, postinal awreness and leadership, while McAuley adds superb tackling ability, a bit more pace than Olsson and better support going forward. Dawson's game is pretty much identical to Olsson's so that's why McAuley was given the nod.
I beleive that we should sell Olsson, because it couldn't be less true that there are no defenders in the world that are as good as Olsson that fit in our badget: Sylvain Distin, Michael Turner and Mergim Mavraj. I believe that if we bring in a better takler and someone who does not defend so deeply, like one of these, then Dawson could fill Olsson's hole. I'm not saying these defenders aren't physical, however; I just believe that these could be played effectively further forward, which Olsson can't because he can't tackle and he doesn't have the pace to recover.