Steve Mandanda against Hugo Lloris. The matchup was attractive. The style clash. The healthy rivalry. Both young prospects for the goalkeeper position of the French national team were in the spotlight on this 24th matchday of Ligue 1. Journalists compare them. Who is the best? Who handles the pressure better? And so many questions with abstract answers. Only the truth of the game matters. Undoubtedly, on Sunday night, Steve Mandanda, in flashy orange, the Marseille goalkeeper, was decisive. First against Ederson early in the game, then against Anthony Modeste towards the end of the match. He made two risky outings but was otherwise very present in the air, particularly intercepting crosses from Cyril Rool. The young player from Nice, in turquoise, could not keep his goal unbreached. Hugo Lloris, is not completely without fault on the two Marseille goals. On Mamadou Niang’s goal, he floated like the rest of the red and black defense. On Djibril Cissé’s goal, he deflected Taiwo’s cross onto the Marseille striker. He showed his qualities on a late first-half strike from the same Cissé where he stretched full length to divert the ball. In the second half, he was crucial against Eliot Grandin. Sometimes, talent is not enough! Let’s continue the little game of abstract questions to decide who, Lloris or Mandanda, is the best: Would Hugo Lloris have stopped the shots from Ederson and Modeste? Could Steve Mandanda have prevented Niang and Cissé from scoring? Football and its eternal questions…
Is Marseille Superior to Nice?
Put differently: is the pragmatism of Marseille a sign of OM’s superiority? One might be tempted to answer yes. This Nice-Marseille game resembled hundreds of matches where at the end you say: they could have played for hours without being able to score. Eric Gerets has transformed a collection of individuals into a solid and unshakeable team. This OM is far from the team we saw in the first leg! Gaël Givet and Jacques Faty used their physical strength to patch the few breaches left by a very compact midfield consisting of Cana, Cheyrou, and Grandin. For one of the very first times this season, the trio Hellebuyck, Echouafni, Balmont appeared hesitant. Hellebuyck and Balmont failed to find free spaces to disturb the Marseille rearguard. That is probably the key to the match. Nice may have dominated, had the ball possession, but the midfield never managed to change pace. With a slow tempo, it’s difficult for the Niçois sprites (Modeste, Ederson, Bamogo) to make the difference. Anthony Modeste created chances in the opening minutes. Marseille players, surprised by a player they did not know, committed fouls and received warnings. Once the element of surprise dissipated, they effectively locked down the young eagle and especially cut off connections with his midfield. QED or rather QEFF (what needed to be done).
Let’s put Paris in a bottle. If Nice had played like they did against Nancy, could Marseille have won? What an interesting question! Answer it, dear readers! Subsidiary question: why didn’t Nice play like against Nancy? Hint: it’s a matter of performance curve. Sometimes, a team in top form faces an off-form team. And the next weekend, it’s the opposite. Nice against Marseille was a bit like Nancy against Nice. A tired team with a more approximate game facing a team in full confidence and success. The team coached by Frédéric Antonetti, due to the quirks of the schedule, will face successively two high-performing teams: Lens and then Auxerre! The eaglets will have to swiftly become eagles again.
