Former head coach of «Dynamo» Oleksandr Hatzkevych commented on the statements of ex-captain of Kyiv Oleg Luzhny addressed to him in the autobiographical book «Without Compromises. The Honest Story of Our Football».
Oleksandr Hatzkevych
— Oleksandr Mykolayovych, how do you comment on Luzhny’s quote from his book: «When the team was making transfers for defenders, I wasn’t even allowed to watch them, at least on video. This was the case with the purchases of Pivarych, Kendziora, Shabanov. It turns out that even an examination was not required from me. I concluded for myself that the head coach didn’t even care about my opinion?»
— Oleg Romanovych is a respected person, not only in Ukrainian football but also in English football. He has his own opinion and vision on various topics, so his statement didn’t particularly surprise me.
I read an excerpt from Oleg Romanovych’s book, where he expressed his opinion about the Surkis brothers when he was acting head coach — that these people do not know how to manage a football club. That was strange to me. Why did Luzhny go to "Dynamo" for a second time when I invited him as an assistant, to people who do not know how to manage?
As for his statement that he wasn’t consulted about Pivarych, Kendzer, and Shabanov, I do not remember that moment or whether he had any desire to watch these players at all. All questions regarding transfers were discussed with Shatsky and the selection department, but the final word was always mine and the president’s. I do not remember if Luzhny was present at these discussions, but he certainly was involved in the team process.
I clearly remember that Oleg Romanovych suggested left-back Vasyl Kravets, but we then had Pivarych, and later Mykolenko appeared. At that time I said that Vitaliy would be a replacement for Pivarych in the future.
— Luzhny writes in his book that he convinced you to give Mykolenko a chance and trust him more often.
— I will say that Luzhny’s opinion was also taken into account. But the first one who proposed Mykolenko’s candidacy was Shatsky, who worked with him in the Academy and U-19. And the fact that Oleg Romanovych «convinced me», assistants are needed to convince the head coach in some moments. His opinion, as a defender, was important to me. Let’s say that Luzhny can take credit for the fact that Mykolenko started playing well for «Dynamo».
I will say one proverb: «If you have done someone a good deed, step back to a safe distance so that the wave of gratitude does not overwhelm you».
— Luzhny also said that when you were serving a suspension in a match against «Olympik», he took the team onto the field, wanted to make a substitution, but you did not allow him. Sometimes you gave him the floor in the locker room when the situation became critical, and it was necessary to raise your voice, at that moment «the players got scared like mice». But, says Luzhny, emotions alone won’t take you far, and systemic work is needed.
— I remember the game against «Olympik». I watched the match from the upper stand of the “Olympic” stadium, while Luzhny was on the sideline. Now there is communication, and the coaching staff consulted with me during the match when they wanted to make substitutions, we consulted. But in that game, the head coach was Luzhny, and I gave him all the authority.
Oleg Romanovych is a very impulsive person, and that is why I invited him to my staff, to have diversity. He always has his own opinion and could express it calmly, like any other assistant of mine, but the last word regarding the main lineup was always mine.
And as for Oleg Romanovych raising his voice and the players being scared, the current generation does not always need a whip. We were different: I was the good policeman, Luzhny was the bad policeman, and Shatsky was neutral. That’s how we worked.
— Luzhny says in the book that you worked in the interests of one agency, not naming it, but it can be guessed that he refers to ProStar Shabliya. As an example, he cites the transfer of the left-back Kadiry.
— Let him then say outright, in the interests of which agency I worked? We had players from ProStar, as well as from other agencies. «Dynamo» worked with many, and at that time I did not have a contract with any agent.
When we were looking for reinforcements, we first looked at our own graduates, then at the domestic championship, and only then did the foreign vector come into play. We were constantly in contact with the selection department. I could not make decisions without Mykhailychenko, Bezsonov, and the club president.
— How was it for you to work with Luzhny?
— Of course, we had disagreements and disputes, but this is a normal process — when people have different opinions. If everyone agrees with the head coach, there will be no progress. Oleg Romanovych and I had a normal relationship. Two years later, I signed a new contract with “Dynamo”, and if I was not satisfied with Oleg Romanovych’s work, he would not be in my coaching staff, but I continued to work with him. Luzhny’s opinion has always been important to me, and he also had something to learn.
— Were you surprised that he wrote such things about you in the book?
— I gave you an example of his statement about the Surkis brothers at the beginning. It is strange to me that Luzhny said such a thing about them. He also touched on Leonenko, Sabo, Kalytvyntsev.
I am generally interested, did Oleg Romanovych read his book himself, what did they write there? I will definitely read it. I am curious how much positivity there is, I hope it’s not all negative.
Oleg Romanovych has much to tell: about the transition from Soviet football to the independent Ukrainian championship, about “Dynamo”, “Arsenal”, and the national team. That would be interesting to read, rather than about how everyone worked. Every book should have a happy ending.
Andriy Piskun
