I'm not really sure what they were saying?
The rice and meat are good together, but only one side had rice that was good alone? And the chicken was absorbed by the rice?
The way I interpreted it:
If you finish the chicken first, you're left with rice that just isn't as good as rice with chicken.
Same if you finish the rice first, because the chicken lost some of its flavor to the rice.
On the other hand, whether you finish the horse tartare or the pilaf first, what's left is still as good as both put together.
I might be wrong, though.