— It is impossible not to notice one interesting fact in the reported round: both Lviv teams won, defeating their opponents with a single goal — “Karpaty” won against “Koloss”, and “Rukh” against “Levyi Bereh”. What do you think about these matches?
— In my subjective personal opinion, these were draw matches. In terms of game quality, the match “Karpaty” — “Koloss” looked much better, but, in my opinion, the logical result would have been a draw. The same applies to the match “Rukh” — “Levyi Bereh”.
— How easy was the victory of Kyiv “Dynamo” over “Chornomorets” (3:1)?
— It was expected. I would say this: “Chornomorets” earned its points and is now in the position where it should be. “Dynamo” was undoubtedly the favorite in this match and outperformed the “sailors” in all respects even in the first half.
— It seems that “Shakhtar” has drawn conclusions after numerous points losses in the first half of the first round. Can the decisive score of 6:0 in the miners' encounter with “Inhulets” indicate this?
— According to the first half, I wouldn’t say that “Inhulets” deserved such a crushing defeat. However, in the second half, when the team from Petrovo opened up and free zones appeared, “Shakhtar” demonstrated their ability to capitalize on the opponent's mistakes.
We see that “Inhulets” has been playing this way for more than one match: they play well in the first half but unfortunately open up in the second when they are behind in score and rush forward to equalize. And “Shakhtar,” having recently gained momentum, skillfully used all the chances, scoring six goals. By the way, the score could have been even higher. At the same time, in my opinion, “Inhulets” deserved at least one goal.
— Last weekend, “Vorskla,” facing LNZ, achieved its second consecutive victory.
— Now some coaches want to play very modern football, where various intricate terms like “build-up” are in vogue. And the coach of the Poltava team, Yuriy Maksymov, made everything simpler: taking into account the heavy field and knowing that LNZ would try to play the Spanish way from Andress Carrasco, he applied his vision. And he wasn’t mistaken.
Regarding the Cherkasy team, I can say this: they gathered players, but there is no team. Take, for example, the legionnaires. They already do not look their best psychologically in the first match, some are “pushing” each other. And “Vorskla” won due to gameplay discipline and the “physicality” that Maksymov improved during the November break of the championship. Using a 4-4-2 scheme, the Poltava team managed to earn three points and to showcase typical Ukrainian autumn football.
— Was “Kryvbas's” victory over “Obolon” in Kyiv a logical result?
— Matches at “Obolon Arena” against its hosts are usually tough. However, “Kryvbas” did not back down and demonstrated their solidity. Scoring a goal, the Kryvyi Rih players played correctly on counterattacks, and in the second half acted skillfully positionally, playing defensively, “for the result”. Apart from one header from the “Obolon” player during a flank pass near the goal of “Kryvbas,” there were no significant moments.
— The high-profile match took place in Rivne, where the tenacious “Veres” met one of the leaders of the championship, “Aleksandriya”.
— This game can be conditionally divided into three different periods. The first one lasted until about the 30th minute of the first half, when there was complete dominance of “Veres” in terms of aggression and desire to score and win. The Rivne team had good chances to capitalize on them. But after a penalty kick awarded against the guests, which I find hard to comment on (let the refereeing experts, who always comment on such situations, do that), the hosts scored.
“Aleksandriya” certainly wanted to win and increased their play in the second half. And when Aleksandriya player Belyaev scored a goal, the refereeing team disallowed it. Although the ball had hit the net from a Rivne defender, and the author of the decisive shot was already positioned along the line of defenders. The referees' interpretation at that moment was according to their discretion. So it can be said that “Aleksandriya” dominated the opponent in the second half, looked better and deserved to equalize. Therefore, the result of this match can be considered logical.
— The same result of 1:1, as in Rivne, was fixed in the match between “Polesie” and “Zarya”. For many, this was unexpected. But for you?
— For me, definitely — no. I believe that “Zarya” is a good team and could have hoped for even more in this match. I like the Lugansk team for its selection of skillful players and combination play. But “Zarya” lacks solid defensive play.
The match in Zhytomyr pleased me: it was played on equal terms, both teams wanted to win. “Zarya” added in the second half and had opportunities to score. Also, before that, the Lugansk team missed a good chance when Yatsyk, running about fifty meters with the ball, made an excellent pass to a teammate. Budkivskyi could have scored again. In my opinion, if it hadn't been for the expulsion of “Zarya” player Vantukh, the Lugansk team could have won. Overall, the game was interesting.
Vyacheslav Kulchytsky
Vladimir Sharan
