Renowned expert and coach Oleh Fedorchuk analyzed the roster of the Ukrainian national team for the final World Cup 2026 qualifying matches against France (November 13) and Iceland (November 16).
Oleh Fedorchuk’We only have three forwards and nine defenders on the roster. Why not call Budkivskyi or Tverdokhlib?'
— Mr. Viktorovych, share your impressions of Rebrov’s squad for the November matches. What strengths and weaknesses does this team have?
— I once again note the inconsistency in some of Rebrov’s decisions. For instance, the inclusion of Volynets, the main goalkeeper of 'Polissya', even though in the previous call-up Bushchan was summoned, who then and now doesn’t play for the team from Zhytomyr. The logic falters.
I am also concerned about the presence of five central defenders and three defensive midfielders. Everyone understands that our main task in these matches is to secure a victory over Iceland. It seems to me that our lineup lacks creative players.
We need to take risks. In total, we have nine defenders and only three forwards on the roster—this doesn’t seem very pragmatic, considering our circumstances. In the match against the Icelanders, there will be plenty of battles, and we lack a forward in form who could challenge them physically.
— Which forward could Rebrov have called based on these criteria?
— Both Blohin and Fomenko at one time did not shy away from calling up players for one or two games who were in form in the championship. You don’t need to be a great analyst, just follow the UPL. Currently, among the prolific Ukrainian attacking players who play well in the air and don’t shy away from battles, there are only two—first and foremost, Pylip Budkivskyi from 'Zorya' and Yehor Tverdokhlib from 'Kryvbas'.
All national teams practice such unexpected call-ups for many for decisive matches. Just recall the previous call-up story with Malinovskyi. How long hadn’t he been included in the Ukrainian national team’s roster? And then he got in form, got better conditions at 'Genoa', received a call-up, started in the lineup, and performed at 100%.
Again, there’s no need to be afraid to take risks in a situation where World Cup qualification is reaching its final stages. Calling Budkivskyi or Tverdokhlib would be a justified risk. I also have questions about Shaparenko’s inclusion.
— Shaparenko, before stepping on the field at the end of the Lviv 'Klassyko', last played for 'Dynamo' back in early October. I understand you are also surprised by his call-up to the national team, given his lack of playing practice.
— Meanwhile, Pikhalyonok has demonstrated well for 'Dynamo' during this time, being in good form. Why isn’t he in the national team then? So, Shaparenko is being called up for past merits, not for current ones. Although it’s not to say he’s a key national team player without whom it’s hard to imagine our team’s game.
’Yarmolenko has a huge influence on the younger generation of Ukrainian national team players'
— At such final stretches of international tournament qualification, experience plays a huge role. To me, it would be logical for Rebrov to call up living legend of this team, Andriy Yarmolenko, and the experienced creative captain of 'Dynamo', Vitaliy Buyalskyi, for these matches. Would you agree?
— Regarding Buyalskyi, I doubt his bright leadership qualities, but concerning Yarmolenko, I agree 100%. In the past, Rebrov called Andriy, who helped the national team as much as he could. What has changed now? Moreover, Yarmolenko is currently in much better shape than when Rebrov called him to the national team. Andriy now has good conditions, scores goals, playing not in his main position.
In general, Yarmolenko is a player who has a huge influence on the younger generation of players. To me, Andriy is one of the most authoritative active Ukrainian footballers playing right now. It’s important not to underestimate his influence in the dressing room: he could calm or energize his teammates at the right moment. I don’t understand why Rebrov didn’t call Yarmolenko.
— How do you see the return of 'Dynamo' defender Karavaev to the Ukrainian national team, who has 4+4 this season in 16 matches for the club? The last time Oleksandr played for the national team was over two years ago.
— It’s not a fact that Karavaev will play, but his presence suggests Rebrov isn’t very pleased with the right flank of defense. This problem isn’t going away. Especially since we have two games ahead, and for years, it’s been the second match that we perform worse.
In the match against Iceland, we will need attacking flank defenders. My experience doesn’t allow me to call Karavaev a pure defender, he’s a versatile player. His functions are broader than just defensive. Playing as a right-back, Karavaev is more beneficial to the attack than the defense.
— The Ukrainian national team called up 'Austin' defender Oleksandr Svatok for the last two camps, who didn’t play a single minute in the World Cup 2026 qualifiers. This time Rebrov also included him in the squad. Question: how appropriate is it to continuously call Svatok, whom the national team doesn’t really see on the field but who constantly needs to cover huge distances by plane from the USA to Europe?
— Maybe it’s some superstition of Rebrov. I’m joking, of course. Even our Master—Valeriy Vasylovych Lobanovskyi—was known for his superstitions. He always noted who was present in the team during a loss and who during a win. All this was calculated as a factor of luck. Perhaps, in Svatok’s case, it’s just superstition, or maybe something else.
We shouldn’t deceive ourselves: we haven’t seen how Svatok plays for 'Austin'. However, we can suspect he isn’t good enough to feature in the matches of the Ukrainian national team. We have enough players of this type in Ukraine.
I like how experienced Shabanov has been playing for the second year in a row now, who has his flaws. Last season he played for 'Olexandriya'—there was the best defense, now for 'Metalist 1925′—and now there’s the best defense, no one has conceded less than the Kharkiv team in the championship. That says something.
The national team isn’t a private club; it’s a societal phenomenon where one needs to partially consider the fans' reaction and experts' opinions. And all of this is the head coach’s responsibility. We can only observe and comment on these decisions. I hope Rebrov’s decisions will be more consistent and that communication will be at a higher level than now. Is it difficult for him to explain his choices to the fans?
’Calling Batagov is quite logical. And I understand Rebrov’s decision to call Hutsulyak instead of Veletnii'
— Among Rebrov’s squad is a debutant—'Trabzonspor' defender Arseniy Batagov. What do you think about this call-up?
— The press surrounding him is good, but he didn’t play very confidently for the Ukrainian youth team. The Turkish championship is currently being talked about as a tournament of quite a good level. Calling Batagov is quite logical. I think it’s a reaction by the Ukrainian national team coaching staff to his successful club performances.
Therefore, I’m even more surprised why this principle wasn’t applied to the forward position. Again, forwards can be varied, changed; they get more fatigued than defenders. Especially since defense usually relies on a proven pair, the team depends more on their reliability than the forward’s game.
— Five center-backs on the roster, and most likely, the same Matvienko-Zabarnyi duo will play in both matches.
— Yes, we have an obvious overload of defenders.
— We currently have the Hutsulyak phenomenon, who plays resultatively for the national team but hardly features for 'Polissya'. Meanwhile, Rebrov calls up Oleksii instead of Veletnii, who has more playing time in the club. How do you explain this decision?
— Here I understand Rebrov. When looking at the big picture, recent national team matches outweigh recent performances at the club or a lack of playing time. We have to admit Hutsulyak performed very confidently in his recent matches for the national team. This impression remains in the memory, not that he doesn’t play much for 'Polissya'.
It seems to me that Hutsulyak underperforms at the club. His behavior and dedication at 'Polissya' hints that he wants to change clubs. I’ve heard rumors that agents are looking for a club for him. Hence, he has greater motivation for the national team. The situation is similar to the Brazilians of 'Shakhtar', who look better in European competitions than in Ukrainian championship matches.
— Is that why he loses competition at 'Polissya'?
— Hutsulyak has very good speed, technique, a shot, he’s a tactically savvy player, but his flaw is a lack of aggression in the game. If he added more in that component, his value would increase. However, Oleksii can afford to be inconspicuous during most of the match, even though he’s the highest-paid player at 'Polissya'. If you earn the most, you need to be the best on the field—that’s how it should work, right?
Probably because of this, they’re dissatisfied with him at 'Polissya'. Meanwhile, Veletnii, who was coming on as a substitute for 'Kolos' two years ago, seems more driven. Probably that’s why he plays more in 'Polissya'.
— Finally, what are your expectations for our national team in the matches against France and Iceland?
— I’m expecting strategic decisions from the coaching staff. If we focus all our efforts on the match against France and lose, everyone will forget about it, even if we perform well in the game. And up next is the crucial game against Iceland, where we only need a win and fresh players.
We need to approach these matches very thoughtfully: not to appear as mere statistics against the French while also being in good shape for the match against Iceland. Although Icelanders face the same problem, it’s even more challenging for them as they don’t have the squad depth that our team has. I think we still need to preserve key players for the match against France.
Vladislav Liutostansky
