I generally enjoy your posts but that is a bit harsh.

When he came on at st James park CB pressed in attack bought free kicks in the attacking half and slowed down the game thereby helping to minimise any action in the defensive half. That is he defended from the front.

Perhaps mateta isn't as good at that role.

Is it that harsh? I think defending from the front is a complete exaggeration of how we play. Defending from the front requires attacking intent. If you're all in your own half most of the game it's not defending from the front.
I'm perhaps harsh, but consider this, I don't disagree with Willo that Benteke defends corners. Is that a reason to pick him? Not in my opinion.
As for the hold up play - considering the amount Mateta has played, I could just as well say he's a super striker, he's scored a goal on his only full appearance - I'm not saying that, but it's the same thing. We haven't had long enough to judge him. We have all had long enough experience of Benteke.

Red and Blue Army!

Less about trust and more about defensive qualities! Kinda understandable if you need to hang on to a lead with 10 minutes to go - but starting with a striker who has such a poor scoring record and on top of that not playing to his strengths week after week! Yikes!
Add into the equation his contract ending whilst our Future striker (who does score goals) warms the bench - and it makes for a very odd decision to keep playing him. (Or extremely stubborn)!

This issue of Benteke being picked for his defending has been addressed before. Roy mentioned it as part of a wider appraisal in which he clearly placed Benteke's defending second to his role in helping us start attacks, which as we all know to the point of tedium, involves playing with his back to goal - something Mateta may not be so good at.

All teams have to get up the pitch somehow. If the opponent sits back (as Man Utd and West Brom did) then we will have more of the ball and can build play in our own time. If the opponent presses us, then we either need to be good enough to pass it through them (we aren't), or bypass them. That means going from back to front quickly, and requires either a forward with pace to run behind their defence, or one who can show for the ball and hold it up.

Roy started the season with Batshuayi up top, aiming to use his pace in behind to stretch teams back, making a bit of space for Wilf to get on the ball. As we know, Batshuayi has been crap, and defeats the point of the strategy by constantly running offside, so Roy turned to Benteke, who has been OK in patches.

I get the desire to see Mateta play instead of Benteke as the former might be more likely to convert chances, but that doesn't matter if we make even less chances because we can't get up the pitch.

All of this is subject to change. Mateta may improve his hold up play. We may change our style to go direct a little less. We might somehow sign a far better forward then either of them. Who knows? The point surely is that none of these things are going to happen right now, when points are at stake.

To say Benteke plays instead of a goalscorer simply because he defends well is nonsense.

You don't pick a striker on his ability to defend corners, end of story. Perhaps you want to defend that, that's the nonsense. You must be a computer programmer with your use of logic.

Red and Blue Army!

A good post BTP. Also, to be fair to Benteke, this season, he's had just 13 starts in the PL and 9 brief sub appearances (including the famous Amex one!) for his 5 goals and 1 assist. So as you say, he's been ok; nothing more than that. Can't see us signing a 'far better forward', though - will cost too much. As for Mateta, I'm sure his time will come. It often takes time for players from abroad to settle in the PL.

As for attackers defending, the best PL teams require it, albeit a lot further up the field!