”With its unique game, Cercle forces the opponent to adapt. So it must be done. But do it this much and for this long? No. Anderlecht have adapted too much. That's always the danger when the recipe has worked, especially four days before. But there, Cercle had recovered its axial defense and Muslic had made some adjustments. Ashimeru could have turned the match around but the fact that he was paired with Delaney and Rits highlights the problem of impact in the physical combat that the Circle imposes. Couldn't Riemer have thought of playing a better game to suggest something else since it wasn't working? He will also retort that he can win the match at the end. But, at the risk of repeating myself, the absence of Thorgan was detrimental on several points. In the game but in set phases. Seeing Debast (very well) take this corner which should have resulted in a goal is revealing. There is a lack of variety of profiles.”
2. “These penalty stories are boring”
”There was no penalty. Neither on the action of Angulo, nor on that of Daland. This last action is the perfect example of the evolution of the rule that has been amended. That the ball first touches another part of the body, in this case the defender's thigh, is a mitigating circumstance when there is a subsequent handball. The penalty is theoretically possible but the referee felt that he could not remove his arm. Rightly so for me. If we pushed further, there could have been a penalty for Cercle. And I oppose the mind to the rule because the hand is the result of a technical error on the clearance which, therefore, in the mind can cost a penalty. But these stories of penalties are boring: they can decide the outcome of a championship literally from nothing.”
Anderlecht cannot do it on the road and concedes a draw to Cercle (1-1)
3. “Charleroi needs consistency”
”For Charleroi, it’s mission accomplished but the relief should not entirely erase the disappointment. The absence of points division has played a role: it respects sporting fairness and reduces tension in a baroque formula with a quarter of the championship teams still affected by relegation. The penalty taken by Koffi against RWDM is the turning point of these POs because it changes everything. He gave the team comfort in the same way as this victory in Kortrijk. The winter transfer window bore fruit: Dari was the king of the pitch at Eupen, being important when necessary in the opponent's area. Petris gained momentum and Camara, already important with Mazzù, continued to be so with De Mil. Between the two coaches, the philosophies differ more than the style of play. And it is above all the notion of pleasure and motivation which have resurfaced. Heymans is the perfect example: in their behavior, many players are different, re-motivated after this famous psychological shock. It remains to be seen if De Mil can have what Mazzù only had at the end: consistency between his way of playing and recruitment.”
The expert's opinion: as long as management is as far-sighted as this winter
