Well-known Ukrainian coach Oleh Fedorchuk shared his thoughts on Dynamo’s championship and the "pain points" in the game of the Kyiv team.
Oleh Fedorchuk— One can ask many questions without basis regarding the blurred finish of the championship in Dynamo’s performance. But the championship is like a marathon. A marathon runner can also be asked why he runs a bit slower at the finish than at the start. But if he has completed his distance — it speaks for itself, and this result must be respected.
The second point — in any phenomenon, sometimes it is necessary to use the method of comparison. Take the Italian championship, where Napoli draws a decisive match 0:0 with practically the outsider Parma. However, nobody diminishes Napoli’s merits. As a rule, at the end of the season, underdogs are often more motivated than leaders, thus it is not surprising in sports.
At the same time, analyzing the championship of Kyivans and what accompanied it, one can highlight three factors. The first is economic. Clubs have sharply reduced financial expenditures, which has had a significant impact on the quality of legionnaires; they are virtually absent in Dynamo, and one person who almost did not play cannot be called a legionnaire. Thus, the championship has somewhat leveled out, as the mid-level teams remained at their previous level while the giants reduced their expenses.
The second factor — very thoughtless steps by Shakhtar’s management, when the club changed several coaches over three years, leading to instability in both the squad and in selection and other aspects.
The third factor — it stems from the first. Due to the lack of extra funds, many of their own graduates are being brought in. This will have its benefits in the future, yielding pure profit, but for now, they are gaining experience. Therefore, it is not worth approaching the evaluation of Dynamo’s championship too critically, since nobody expected such success at the beginning of the season.
— What is the contribution of the head coach to the championship, how much does Oleksandr Shovkovskyi control the processes occurring in the team?
— A coach is a separate profession. It’s good when a coach played. However, history shows that it is not always necessary to play at the highest level to be a successful coach. One condition here is time. It never happens that a coach comes in, and immediately, like in Zhytomyr’s Polissia, they go all out. In any case, a period of comprehension, mistakes is needed. Shovkovskyi is remembered for making mistakes, but he corrected them. There are players who lose the ball, but those footballers are valued who lose it and at the same time go to the end to regain the ball until they take it back. I like Shovkovskyi for his stubbornness, for his logical actions. Undoubtedly, he made mistakes and took significant risks by relying solely on Neshcheret, who, in fact, had no experience and was raw at the start of the season. To give the role of conductor to the youngest player in the team like Mykhavko, who makes gross mistakes — that is always interesting but too risky.
Shovkovskyi is a promising coach, but I must also say that, in my opinion, Yarmolenko played a big role in Shovkovskyi’s success. He was there when needed, took responsibility upon himself. Even in the last match against Chornomorets, which was very difficult, he took the responsibility to take the penalty. The fact that Shovkovskyi found common ground with Yarmolenko speaks volumes.
— Are you not afraid that the 35-year-old Yarmolenko is currently carrying the team, and Dynamo with Yarmolenko and without him — are two big differences, as they say in Odesa?
— Here, it’s a matter of time, plus how much Yarmolenko overshadows young players. With rare exceptions, Andriy does not play the entire match. Secondly, this is not the case where Shovkovskyi, as we remember, overshadowed all the goalkeepers at Dynamo. Yarmolenko does not take work from other players — he adds it to them. He is not the footballer who pulls the blanket over himself. He just takes responsibility upon himself. However, the team needs players who will not constantly hide behind someone. At the same time, I would not say that Yarmolenko leads the game. He is a leader, but it cannot be said that he is the architect of the game. The ones who can be more considered that are Shaparenko and Mykhavko. They create the picture that exists today in Dynamo’s game.
— Returning to the goalkeeper issue. Neshcheret makes numerous mistakes, as shown in the last match against Chornomorets and the goal conceded by Kyivans. And he will make many more, without which he will not develop as a high-class goalkeeper. But is there currently real competition at Dynamo for this position, especially in the context of the upcoming performances of the "white-blues" in the Champions League? Maybe it’s worth looking for someone on the domestic market?
— It must certainly be looked into. But Dynamo has a good school, in that same Obolon, there is a young but already very good Denys Marchenko. Trust in players needs to increase at the first opportunity. Competition is definitely necessary, I think they are already pondering this at Dynamo. It is impossible to solve serious problems with one goalkeeper; Shakhtar has clearly shown this.
— Has the bet on Ukrainian graduates paid off? Who has shone and who has disappointed?
— Brahar started off very well, but then, due to injury, he faded and ended up in the shadows. However, it is too early to write him off. Let’s remember how Kabayev struggled to fit into Dynamo, everyone thought, why did they sign him. Now he is a good player who makes a difference. As for Rubchynskyi — here I have a puzzle; I believe that he stylistically does not fit Dynamo: he is too focused on controlling the ball, while Dynamo plays a little differently, through the flanks. Regarding Pikhaylonok, I was sure he would push Yarmolenko out of the lineup, but he lost the competition to both Yarmolenko and Buialskyi. Although the latter has faded in the last three games, he has done well overall this season. Why did it happen with Pikhaylonok? Either due to injury or a lack of competitive spirit. Somehow he resigned himself to the role of joker, but I expected more from him; he has decent potential.
On the other hand, Mykhailenko looked very good, Dubinchak looks good, while Vanat, I believe, had his best season. Mykhavko, although he made many mistakes, but it can be seen with the naked eye that the potential in the guy is very high. Footballers who are not afraid of responsibility and also possess passing skills — they are worth their weight in gold.
— Can Brahar still return to his former positions? After all, Mykhailenko has practically ousted him from the supporting zone.
— The competition there is incredibly high. It seems to me that someone must leave the team.
— Which position should Dynamo strengthen first?
— One does not need to be an expert to understand that at least one high-quality central defender is needed, who will play the very next day after signing. And, of course, a central striker who will create competition for Vanat. The latter is not always noticeable in the game, and there is noticeable psychological inconsistency. A right-back would not hurt either. We have already discussed the goalkeeper.
— Who, as they say, here and now can and should be sold so that the footballer does not "over-mature"?
— In my opinion, it is necessary to change the concept of selling footballers, to sell them at their peak, not when you want to. You need to cling to any transfer and sell as much as possible. Do not haggle, but sell those who have shone. And nothing if it leads to a loss in price. If it’s low, then just, like in trade, you need to increase the sales volume. If you sell a player not for 50 million, but for 25, it’s better to sell two for 25 than to haggle over one for 50. This is definitely a bonus for the club in terms of marketing. If you go this way, then there will be a certain number of such players among Kyivans who can already be and should be sold. I believe everyone wins from this.
