Famous Ukrainian coach Oleksandr Babych shared his impressions of the central match of the 28th round of the Ukrainian championship, in which Shakhtar Donetsk and Dynamo Kyiv met in Lviv yesterday (1-0).
Oleksandr Babych. Photo by Yurii Yuriev- The nerve of the match was very much felt, and the game kept everyone in suspense until the last second. The history of the UPL, Shakhtar and Dynamo is being created by new players, while legends such as Yarmolenko and Stepanenko are in the background.
- Was the Shakhtar victory natural?
- A draw would have been a fairer result, but it happens in football that not everything is logical.
- Were you surprised by Dynamo's starting line-up? For example, the absence of Yarmolenko in the starting line-up, or the choice in defence in favour of Vivcharenko and Dyachuk?
- To give an answer, you need to understand what Oleksandr Shovkovskyi's coaching plan was. In my opinion, Dynamo was going to close down in the first half and try to run out on the counterattack. However, something went wrong... Kabayev had the only real scoring chance before the break. Dynamo had no quality counter-play. As for Yarmolenko, I also expected to see him in the starting line-up. But in the second half, Shakhtar played to the scoreline and achieved their goal.
- What do you think of the penalty? As far as I understand it, a defender, countering an opponent in his own penalty area, should put his hands down...
- I'll say right away that the 11-metre penalty was unambiguous. As for the defenders, they should not just keep their hands down, but behind their backs. Look at how the defence players of the leading teams in the Champions League act. But this is the class of a footballer... I am in favour of such penalties because the ball flew into the goal.
- Let's fantasise. If the first half had ended in a zero-all draw, would Dynamo have had a chance of overall success?
- The first goal always makes adjustments to the game. However, if you recall the football played by Dynamo before the break, there was very little creativity from Kyiv, and after the break they could score mainly after the draw of standards - the same corners, of which there were many. Yes, Shovkovskyi reacted correctly and in time to the events after the first half, releasing Yarmolenko, after which the pattern of the game changed, but did the head coach of the White and Blues have the opportunity to change something more significantly - to qualitatively strengthen the game in attack? Hardly ... Unlike Dynamo, Shakhtar have a better choice of substitutes, and these players are fast and technical.
- However, Shovkovskyi could have tried to play someone else besides Yarmolenko. I mean earlier substitutions than those made in the 77th and 88th minutes...
- You could have thrown Ponomarenko into the battle earlier. Why him? Because he was, in fact, the only substitute forward. Of course, it was necessary to strengthen Dynamo's attacking group, but Shepelev came on and dissolved on the field...
- Why did Shakhtar's game change so much after the break? "Did the Miners decide to switch on the maximum rationality mode?
- At the start, by the 5th minute, Shakhtar had made three dangerous shots at Dynamo's goal. "The Miners started very actively. I agree that the tactics of Pushic's team in the second half were somewhat risky. There could have been trouble for Shakhtar, especially after Brazko's shots, and especially in the 65th to 75th minute. I think that there was no coaching instruction to sit in such a low defensive unit. It was Dynamo who forced the Shakhtar to play like that. I would like to highlight the excellent work of the referee, who did not succumb to provocations and gave both teams the opportunity to play.
- Who can you single out in Shakhtar's squad?
- First of all, Sudakov, who actually led his team's entire game and did a great job overall. I would also like to mention Kevin - he did a very good job on the wing, causing a lot of problems for Dynamo.
- Did anyone in the Dynamo team deserve to be recognised?
- In a positive sense, I can single out two - Brazhko, who played at a more or less decent level, and Yarmolenko, who was able to make a difference in the course of events on the field. I expected more from Shaparenko and Vanat - I think he was a bit burnt out, very nervous, perhaps because the opponents did not give him space and he could not turn on his speed.
- Can we say that the result of the classic was a coaching defeat for Oleksandr Shovkovskyi?
- In the first half, the Dynamo coach's ideas did not work. By the way, I have not yet mentioned how Voloshyn disappeared on the pitch literally from the first minutes, whose appearance in the "start" was a coaching decision by Shovkovskyi, who then understood everything and released Yarmolenko. But Shakhtar played both halves competently - yes, in different ways, but effectively. So this is a coaching victory for Marino Pušić.
- The golden intrigue in the UPL died two rounds before the finish...
- It's a pity, of course. It would have been interesting for all neutral fans if Dynamo had won. However, the White and Blues are to blame. "In the battle for the championship, Dynamo should not have lost points in such matches as with Veres and LNZ. Now the schedule would be different... In general, I would say that Shakhtar's triumph in the Ukrainian league is well-deserved and natural. "The Miners covered the distance more smoothly, especially at the finish.
- What needs to be improved in Shakhtar's game before the Champions League?
- We need to strengthen the centre of defence and the support area, that is, find a replacement for Stepanenko. The position of the right-back is also in question, because, in my opinion, Konoplya alone is not enough...
Oleg Semenchenko
