Well-known Ukrainian coach and expert Oleg Fedorchuk shared his impressions of the first match of the 2nd qualifying round of the Conference League between Vorskla Poltava and Swedish AIK (3:2), which took place last Thursday in Stockholm.
Oleg Fedorchuk"Vorskla" agreed to "accept" AIK on its field due to some expediency"
‒ Viktor Skrypnyk had very little time to prepare, let alone reformat the line-up. Is this a big problem for Vorskla on the eve of the match with AIK?
- Of course, this affected the preparation - after all, in Ukraine, it is more convenient for a new coach to modify a new team in winter, when the break is longer.
But in favor of Skripnik, the fact that most of the players after the predecessor remained at his disposal. And among the newcomers, almost all are experienced guys, such that they already knew the Ukrainian championship and even this team.
- The fact that Vorskla agreed to "receive" AIK at its home stadium was perceived by many as a premature capitulation. Agree?
‒ If it were possible to play in Ukraine, we would call such a decision surprising. However, under the current circumstances, all of our home matches are, as it were, away matches.
We do not know the conditions provided by AIC. Since Vorskla agreed to play "at home" on the opponent's field, it means that there was some economic expediency in this.
‒ Did Vorskla's starting lineup surprise you in any way?
- It corresponded to what Skrypnyk played at the training camp. It was interesting how 4-4-2 would play - after all, Maksimov often had a different scheme. Secondly, of course, the experienced newcomers of the team, Oleinik, as well as the previously signed Batsula and Zaikov, aroused interest.
What pleased me was that Skrypnyk was not afraid to play his own game of football - although, as we said, most of his players remained from his predecessor, and there was little time to reformat.
"Quality counterattacks - the idea of Skrypnyk"
‒ An early goal and a particularly quick response to a missed one showed that Vorskla is ready to play boldly and take a hit. What accounted for these two goals in the first half?
‒ Of course, we will note Kozyrenko. I remember this guy well from the First League, where he played for Gornyak-Sport. In the episode with the first goal, everything was decided by his serve from the kick, very high-quality, sighted. And with the second - a bold performance after a good transfer of Perduta.
By the way, the defenders played well in both goals - without the passes of Batsula, Yavorsky, Perduta, the goal combinations would not have received the necessary acceleration.
‒ The fact that Vorskla often gave away the ball, its thoughtful decision, or is it more the merit of nominal guests - AIK?
‒ I think it was Skripnik's idea. On counterattacks, Vorskla acted well, the game went the way it needed to - there was no point in spreading out and immediately taking it away. On the contrary, attacks towards Poltava opened corridors.
‒ Do you see any similarities in the goals of Stefanelli and Larsson?
- Yes. Vorskla pressed too close to their goal, and this happened because they were underworking in the support zone. Putslin was left alone, Oleinik, who was higher up, often did not have time, and this led to the fact that the defenders backed away.
In addition, quite often AIK tore the left flank of the Vorskla defense. This is the fault not only of Batsula, but also of Zaikov, who did not secure his flank defender. In this regard, the cooperation between Yavorsky and Perduta was much more reliable.
"At Vorskla, almost everything that could" flew "
‒ Why did the pace drop somewhat in the second half? On whose initiative and to whom was it beneficial?
‒ Both teams got hooked - well, Vorskla, it has its first official match of the year, but AIK was unpleasantly surprised in this regard.
‒ Who especially fell out of the game?
‒ Perhaps, Till. It seems that Vincent did not have enough strength. He sat down by the 55th minute. He made a lot of mistakes, even cut the ball into his own net. His replacement was primarily expected and read.
‒ Why did Skrypnyk delay with them then?
- Probably, he still does not fully know the capabilities of his players, he wanted to use the capabilities of the simulated basis more.
- Is Chelyadin's goal a beautiful accident or a meaningful episode?
- Definitely makes sense. Firstly, Yavorsky played great. Secondly, Chelyadin played quite thoughtfully. He beat not for the occasion - for execution.
‒ 3:2 is, of course, excellent, but there is one more match ahead on the opponent's field...
- AIK has already shown its trump cards. And although it will be much more difficult to play, since the hosts will be maximally tuned, Vorskla will have a small, but advantage.
I would like to note that in this match a lot happened in favor of Vorskla. They scored very early, then in the second half Chelyadin returned the advantage to Vorskla with his actually first shot. It doesn’t happen often, but Poltava residents “flew” almost everything they could.
AIK, judging by how he played the game, how he entered into martial arts, believed in his strength after two goals. Somewhere the Swedes thought that the game would be easier for them. This is also the merit of Vorskla - they showed strong-willed qualities, managed to turn the tide of the fight.
"The advantage of Vorskla is 55/45"
‒ Top three players in this match?
- First of all, Kozyrenko - the guy scored the first two goals. This is how it should be done - to develop Ukrainian youth. Vorskla sent him to their farm - "Gornyak-Sport", gave him the opportunity to get stronger on loan. This is the right path, and even more promising than bringing back expensive veteran players or featureless foreigners.
Secondly, I really liked Yavorsky - and in defense he is more reliable than Zaikov, and in general an accomplice of two goals in attack. Well, thirdly, Putslin - there were three "free artists" above him, and in this match he did a very decent amount of work and coped with the center of the field.
‒ What can Vorskla add, and what can AIK add?
‒ The Poltava team needs to improve the interaction between the central and flank defenders, especially on the left. Oleinik needs to pay more attention to defense, as he will need more reliability in the center in the second game. And even in insufficient condition Marlison - against the background of Stepanyuk, he still looked pale.
AIK did not make a holistic impression. Played in snippets. He can clearly add aggression in the attack, because his main threat came from Larsson, the rest of the mid-line players. Perhaps they will risk letting Guidetti go to Stefanello right away. Perhaps another veteran - Lustig - will come out from the first minutes. But Gzhelak will have to change something, because in the first match Vorskla managed to pleasantly surprise.
‒ What is your prediction for the second match?
- Effective draw. Both teams played brilliantly and managed to reveal each other's weaknesses. Vorskla will have a slight advantage - within 55/45.
