We use cookies - they help us provide you with a better online experience.
By using our website you accept that we may store and access cookies on your device.

previous 7/10 next 9/10  RFC Bruges 0 - 8 Gambiti (378365834)

7787 punters turned up at Belfius Arena, and despite threatening clouds on the horizon, no rain came. Teddy Boyd was the appointed referee with assistance provided by Patrik Ingemarsson and Wilfred Scholaert. RFC Bruges decided to use a 2-5-3 set up. Lineup: Gustavsson - Ellebracht, 加藤 (Kato) - Cullen, Delaney, Rogers, Sriwikromkriangkrai, Lennon - Richards, Reardon, Murphy.

Gambiti had chosen a strategic 5-3-2 formation. The following players took the field: Belderink - Konáš, Lecca, Hirsimäki, Langer, 偉宏 (Weihong) - Gripenbratt, Romoli, Paulsson - Canà, Wilmotte.

Gambiti displayed their ability to play creatively. Gambiti's G. Wilmotte managed to lose the defenders as he advanced down the right wing and scored, putting the visitors ahead after 12 minutes. 0 - 1. Speedy I. Gripenbratt tried one of his patented rushes 16 minutes into the game, but 達. 加藤 (Kato) was just as fast and averted the attack. RFC Bruges's W. Sriwikromkriangkrai put his head to a high ball coming in from the right after 17 minutes, but the ball went wide. 24 minutes into the match, the visitors put themselves ahead 0 - 2 as J. Konáš finished off an attack from the left with a spectacular scissors kick. Had it not been for one of the home defenders, R. Romoli would have put Gambiti up another goal 27 minutes into the match with his audacious lob from the right wing. After 30 minutes, an incisive pass through the middle gave M. Lecca a chance to increase the lead for Gambiti, and he did not disappoint. The score was then 0 - 3. V. Langer received a delicate pass through the home side's central defence after 34 minutes, and chipped it past the flailing keeper to score making it 0 - 4. The Gambiti fans went wild, whilst the home fans started to think about leaving early. After this, you could see that the players of Gambiti were more interested in killing time than scoring more goals. It was 0 - 4 at the break. Possession in the forty-five minutes was dominated by Gambiti, with 71 percent of the ball.

The RFC Bruges coach was desperate to reverse his team's fortunes in the game, and ordered his team to change strategy. J. Paulsson left the field with a smile on his face as he was substituted 55 minutes into the game, as his team was in the lead. T. Trane was the replacement. R. Romoli wanted to play on, but the Gambiti coach had other ideas, and he was replaced 55 minutes into the game by H. Ševčík. The visitors' G. Canà took advantage of a misunderstanding between the home side's goalie and centre backs 67 minutes into the match. 0 - 5 for Gambiti. Gambiti increased their lead after 77 minutes when I. Gripenbratt broke through on the right, upping the score to 0 - 6, much to the home crowd's dismay. The coach of Gambiti was happy with the game so far, but still wanted to change the line up. After 80 minutes, P. Largoet came on for B. Belderink. Some fine movement on the left led to a Gambiti goal after 83 minutes, making it 0 - 7. H. Ševčík was noted down as the scorer. G. Wilmotte of Gambiti took advantage of a mistake on the home side's right after 85 minutes which increased the away team's lead to 0 - 8. Gambiti enjoyed most of the ball, as they maintained 75 percent of possession.

Most important RFC Bruges player was L. Lennon. 達. 加藤 (Kato) on the other hand, had a terrible day. Gambiti's best player was G. Canà. P. Largoet turned in a dismal performance, however. The match ends 0 - 8.

Rating details

Midfield poor (high) solid (high) 11 27 3/20 7/20
Right defence poor (very high) formidable (high) 12 35 3/20 9/20
Central defence weak (very low) outstanding (low) 13 38 4/20 10/20
Left defence weak (high) formidable (low) 15 34 4/20 9/20
Right attack inadequate (very high) passable (low) 20 22 5/20 6/20
Central attack weak (very low) solid (very high) 13 28 4/20 7/20
Left attack passable (low) passable (very high) 22 24 6/20 6/20
 
Indirect set pieces
Defence inadequate (very low) formidable (high) 17 35 5/20 9/20
Attack weak (low) formidable (very low) 14 33 4/20 9/20
 
Team attitude (Hidden) (Hidden)
Tactic Normal Play creatively
Tactic skill (no tactic) - (no tactic) -
 
Average midfield poor (high) solid (high) 11 27 3/20 7/20
Average defence weak (low) formidable (very high) 14 36 4/20 9/20
Average attack inadequate (low) solid (very low) 18 25 5/20 7/20
Total average weak (low) excellent (very low) 14 29 4/20 8/20
 
 
Server 096