Former Kyiv Dynamo striker Viktor Leonenko shared his impressions of the 2026 World Cup qualifying match between the national teams of France and Ukraine.
Viktor Leonenko (photo: instagram.com)— Viktor Yevhenovych, what emotions did yesterday’s match leave you with?
— If you look at the tournament table, then this game was not needed for Ukraine at all. Why the hell did we even fly to Paris? We could have saved on tickets. If we played well, the match could have gone into the fund, some players could have been invited somewhere, but as it is... It turned out that we played until the first conceded goal. I really don’t know why Rebrov liked the first half, if we didn’t shoot at the goal and didn’t create chances? How can people not be ashamed that they don’t shoot at the goal? What did they do on the field? Let them ask themselves: do they have the right to call themselves footballers after that?
Imagine, the son of a Ukrainian national team footballer calls his father and asks, 'Dad, why didn’t you shoot at the goal even once today?'. It would be interesting to hear the answer.
And this is far from the first game where we don’t have chances. Whether Dynamo plays only one half or the national team. I would understand if it were Lobanovsky’s team, when 11 Dynamo players played in the national team, but here are different people, and still no chances. Against France, Rebrov already has an excuse — that this is a strong team, and the most important match for us is against Iceland.
Ukraine didn’t shoot at the goal once, and Rebrov is pleased with everything. Now we are all happy when the lights are on, and soon we’ll rejoice when Ukraine creates a chance. And shots on goal — that’s already an event.
— Rebrov released the second squad against France, diluted with Zabarny and Trubin. How do you rate the coaching decision?
— What difference does it make which squad played — the second or the third, if we don’t beat Iceland? Moreover, now there are five substitutions, and in any game, you can change half the team. Any squad against the French team would have lost. We don’t have chances with any players, it’s becoming fashionable.
— It seems that Rebrov had only one plan — to defend for a draw with five defenders, but when we conceded, there was no backup plan. Why was there no plan B, and our players looked so ineffective in the attack?
— The players do not match the level, that’s all. Even if we beat Iceland, what are we going to do with such a game at the World Cup?
— Do you think there was a penalty on Nazaryna?
— There was. I don’t understand why the referee didn’t award a penalty, especially since he watched VAR. The opponent played dangerously with a high foot. But I think that even if he had given a penalty, it wouldn’t have saved us. It would have been 1:4 or 1:6. If there are no shots on goal, you cannot count on a positive result.
— This was Mykhalka’s debut match for the national team. Was he too nervous when he conceded the penalty?
— I was surprised that after the game, Mykhalka said the penalty was 50−50. Didn’t he feel that he stepped on the opponent’s foot? Apparently, he got hit hard in the head with the ball, otherwise, how can you think it’s a disputable penalty. But he didn’t make many mistakes. Well, apart from the passes to nowhere, like our other players.
— Mbappe executed a penalty shot with a panenka. Could Trubin have played better in that moment?
— I would generally change the rules and prohibit a player from stopping during a penalty. Run up and shoot, don’t dance around the ball like the Brazilians love to do!
As for Mbappe’s panenka, when they shoot like that, it means they are not confident and don’t know where to shoot. Plus, it’s disrespectful to the goalkeeper.
— The fans awarded 'Lion of the Match' to Trubin, even though he conceded 4 goals. Do you agree with this opinion?
— When a team concedes four goals, there should be no 'Lion of the Match.' Conceded four, which means there’s no one to credit among the defenders. There were no shots, so the attack also played doubly negative. Trubin was given the award because he saved in several instances, otherwise, it could have been more than four goals.
I would give the 'Lion of the Match' to those players who were lucky not to play in this match.
— And if you name the worst? The flank defenders, Karavaev and Mykhailichenko, played very passively in attack, and Zabarny also had a weak match in defense.
— You can confidently name any of our players as the worst. During Olise’s second goal, where was Zabarny looking? He was right next to him. And Svatok didn’t keep up. It’s always like this with us. The goal is already being scored, and our players are only running up and tackling with caution.
— Do you think, apart from Trubin and Zabarny, will we see anyone from this squad against Iceland?
— You should ask Rebrov. There are people who don’t get tired, but it doesn’t help us much. I think that the lucky ones who rested against France would not have beaten the squad that lost 0:4.
— What are you expecting from the match against Iceland, where we only need a win?
— I’m only expecting luck to be on our side, nothing more. Even in the game where we scored five goals, we conceded three, although it could have been more. The most dangerous thing is that the Icelanders score against all opponents and can be proud of it, while we concede in every match.
Andriy Piskun
