Football: Did Thomas Häberli see himself as a little too good?

Maybe Servette isn’t really ready for that yet, to dominate Swiss Football. Garnets must hope that the habit will come with time. But in the meantime, dropping a rank doesn’t seem to bother anyone. Thomas Häberli in the lead. “Losing that first place? It’s not a problem at all,” smiled, almost relieved, the garnet coach after the 2-2 draw against Lucerne on Thursday.

As if this pressure had inhibited him. It’s a developing theory. As if Häberli had seen himself a little too good after the 3-1 victory in Zurich on Sunday, with this leadership position gleaned. What matters: the choices made by the technician for this mid-week meeting.

Because we can recognize Häberli for the audacity of his decisions in recent weeks while considering that he did not aim just for Thursday. There, one would almost wonder what the coach wanted to play, because the garnet building was a little upset by the options taken.

For the first time in several seasons, Yoan Séverin found himself on the left side of the defense. And not Théo Magnin, despite the author of an excellent performance in Zurich. “There was a tactical reason, with Lucerne’s 4-4-2 diamond,” explains the young full-back. This allowed us to stay three behind with the ball.

This is also what Häberli justifies: “We have been doing this since the start of the season. There, I wanted to have Séverin on the left, to have a left-hander and also to be strong in the aerial game.

He is right: it is not entirely new that Servette adopts this base of three in construction. Even if the approach is often different. Before his injury, Bradley Mazikou was a regular in the possession midfield role, with Keigo Tsunemoto or Gaël Ondoua completing the three.

By changing the situation, Häberli touched the balance and the Servettian structure. The fact of aligning Anthony Baron, rather than Gaël Ondoua, was also surprising: “Anthony started very well against Zurich, in midfield, notes his coach. He finds the spaces, he can shift the game well. That was the idea, and maybe I’ll do it again.”

Either. Except that it’s not just the choice of the players who questioned. This is also the way Servette played, namely with a lot of fluidity in the movements. It was interesting. The constant change of positions made it difficult for Lucerne to read.

But this complexity also resulted in a fragile structure. With fewer markers for losing the ball. Even if Häberli was pleased with his choices: “What we did worked,” he insisted. We were dominant, we controlled the match well.”

We have the right not to completely agree. Because Servette was better than Lucerne, and the control he had over the match (more than 65% possession) speaks for that. But the Garnets did not win, because they lacked control in key moments.

And even if Häberli corrected the situation in the second half, opting instead for a more classic 4-4-2, it must be considered that Servette should have folded this match earlier. To put it down to inexperience: being first is something that can be learned.