On the one hand, the result of this match became a sensation, but Akhmat knows how to tune in to games with Zenit. Remember at least their last match in the first round (0:0). The Petersburgers should have kept this in mind, but the team hardly expected such agility from the Akhmatovites in the first minutes, who began to press hard on the move.

And if the first goal of Grozny already in the 1st minute could not be called too terrible a development for Zenit, then the second goal in the 8th minute, moreover, missed after a frank mistake by Dmitry Chistyakov, already hit the hosts psychologically. Semak’s decision to replace Chistyakov already in the first half also affected the game – the hosts had to urgently rebuild and turn on at full strength, but Akhmat’s good physical readiness, his tight game and good pressure prevented the opponent from finding his line.

Sergei Tashuev’s wards did not panic and did the first half competently. In addition, the goalkeeper of Grozny Giorgi Shelia showed himself well. This course of the meeting “Zenith” was clearly shocked. It was perfectly clear that in the second half the Petersburgers would add. However, the absence of the injured Rodrigao greatly influenced this match. Neither Chistyakov nor Nuraly Alip can replace him. From the second half, Zenit actually played three defenders with Barrios, Lovren and Douglas Santos. Refreshed the game of the hosts and the appearance in their composition after the break of Andrey Mostovoy, who as a result reduced the gap in the score.

Nevertheless, Akhmat did not flinch and was able to resist, Tashuev made competent substitutions. The main factor can be called the bulk of Grozny players in the first minutes, which the team realized to the maximum. It is unlikely that the residents of Grozny themselves expected this, somewhere, perhaps, they were lucky, but it is worth paying tribute to the guests. A competent plan in the form of closing zones, pressing and quick transitions to a counterattack did its job.

Is Tashuev’s hand visible in this victory? He is a very knowledgeable trainer with a lot of experience. With the arrival of Akhmat, he clarified that he got a well-trained team, so he did not make any major changes, especially in tactics. The main change is perhaps the more frequent appearance in the composition of Mohamed Konate. Otherwise, Tashuev simply did not spoil what Andrei Talalaev was accumulating, or rather, used it correctly. If there are changes under Sergei, then we will see them next year after the winter break.

Is it possible to call the defeat of “Zenith” a one-time misfire, or is there some kind of alarming trend in their game? Rather, it is the first option. To some extent, they went into the game with Akhmat too self-confident and did not expect such a start. By the way, if Rodrigao was on the field, I’m sure that Zenit would definitely not have such a failure in defense. In addition, the Petersburgers had misfires before – three draws in the RPL and two defeats in the Russian Cup should have been wake-up calls for them.

Even in the matches won, Zenit had problems. Take the same games with “Torpedo” (2:0) or “Krasnodar” (1:0), when the St. Petersburgers managed to crush the opponents only in the end. Semak’s team needs reinforcements in winter, especially in defense and support zone. At least for competition. Failure with Cassierra also gives reason to think about strengthening the attack. The game with Akhmat exposed all these problems. If Zenit misfires again, the championship race may again become relevant. For the St. Petersburg team, the defeat from Grozny became a clear indicator that not everything is going smoothly for them and talk about the already won championship is premature.

Open video