Ivanov counted a controversial important goal.
In a derby like this, the episodes decide everything
How do you like the fight between Ignatov and Tiknizyan? The Spartak player touched the defender with both hands. We turned to tango, switched to wrestling, but after watching the replay the judge didn’t get it. He didn’t call a foul. Ignatov did not raise his hands, but leaned on his opponent. It’s hard to understand why the aftershocks were ignored. And Tiknizyan is wrong that he did not clear the ball.
But Ignatov put the weight on his opponent, not allowing him to get up. But no one pushed Mikhail with their hands. This is not a mutual power struggle, but a foul. And here is another more subtle episode. Spartak’s defense allowed Miranchuk to run into the penalty area. Ideally, we need an offside line to rule out “offside”, but let’s evaluate the fight between Khlusevich and Anton.
The desire to reach the ball speaks in favor of the defender, and Miranchuk has switched from striking ability to seeking contact. Anton touched the ball lightly, the shot did not work out. Daniil’s hand was on Miranchuk’s back, the touch in his legs more likely than not. Judges – Ivanov and Kazartsev, considered the episode ordinary. Lokomotiv fans will argue.
The slightest touch affects the speed. And Spartak fans, of which there were enough at the match, will patronize Khlusevich with contact ease. This is by no means a one hundred percent penalty. And at the same time, “Spartak” was steps away from trouble, if the contact in the legs was more noticeable. Abascal’s defense made several mistakes in the first half.
This is especially true for reconstruction across the full width of the field. Khlusevich clung to the defending three, fearing to let go of his opponents. Denisov tried to work higher, but Chernov and Jikia are still not able to win forever. For example, they allowed Miranchuk to equalize the score, moreover, two minutes after Ignatov’s heroic strike.
Galaktionov took into account the mistakes from the first match
Mikhail Mikhailovich used the “4-2-3-1” scheme. Miranchuk took the position of “tens”, Dzyuba, Pinyaev and Glushenkov formed the top three forwards. Karpukas and Barinov closed the midfield. This time they worked much better against Zobnin, Litvinov and Prutsev. The inertia of the Spartak midfielders is one of the reasons why Lokomotiv did a lot, unlike the start of the first match.
The home team did not lose the match, controlled the ball, but the opponent improved after the first game. Tiknizyan was actively moving forward, his actions were the focus of the first goal attack. Smolnikov listened to Galaktionov’s suggestions and also played no worse than Nail. The only thing missing was the link between the directors and Dzyuba, hence the replacement of Glushenkov with Kamano.
That’s just Francois dissolved on a green field in a green T-shirt. The wing has no speed, it can’t run away from Jikia. But Spartak’s third goal, of course, nailed Lokomotiv’s morale. It’s hard to swim when the total score was 3:1 in favor of Abaskal. Galaktionov did a good job, as did Miranchuk, who scored twice.
Abascal didn’t like the game “Spartak”
This can be seen not only in the eloquent reaction on the edge, but also in Zinkovsky’s instructions and substitution during the break. The structure of the game fluctuated. Promes and Ignatov closed the position of “false forward”, but there was no place for wide-ranging football. We note that in the end Ignatov played well: Mikhail scored a goal plus a pass, but in the end the winner protected the winning score in the hope of an individual class of Promes.
Quincy set up a goal for Martins – he famously shot. Spartak is obviously stronger than the opponent. But in February there isn’t a huge difference in speed and functional readiness. Not only did Zinkovsky’s match go bad today. Prutsev was also nowhere to be seen. The laterals did not show up in attack. Promes only appeared when he finally moved to the left flank. Spartak is fine, if you remember the time of year – the end of February, but far from the peak.
Hence the chances of a comeback for Lokomotiv in the final. Without Zobnin’s goal, one blow was enough, for example, a standard one with Dzyuba’s participation, to send the teams to take a penalty. There will certainly be controversy over the penalty against Maksimenko, but the episode with the fight between Ignatov and Tiknizyan is in the foreground. It is unlikely that there will be many professional referees working as pundits who will defend Ivanov’s position.
The very fact that the referee was called to the monitor indicates a discrepancy in positions. Referees LAUNCH seen a foul. Ivanov is not Bezborodov, he hasn’t been in such good shape in recent years, so we invite you to a discussion. There are no questions for Spartak, we tried. But when you score the second goal in time, it’s much easier to write the script for the end of the game. Abascal was lucky, with the score 1: 1 in the derby he could have seen a different result.
Lokomotiv made a lot of mistakes
We picked up quality segments that weren’t long enough to say we definitely deserved to go further on the Path RPL and leave Spartak behind. Miranchuk is good, but not the whole team. But it’s great that there’s now a new cup format. Lokomotiv does not leave the tournament after Ivanov’s decisions, but will have another chance to reach the final. And Spartak will be in the semifinals of the main path, that is, they have reinsurance.
Depart from the Path RPL in the semifinals and finals they will receive second chances in the Path of the Regions. But Lokomotiv, if they lose again, will leave the tournament. It is clear that the fans of both clubs and the rest of the public will rightfully focus on refereeing – share your opinion, because the episodes are interesting. But we also note that football was not February. “Spartak” made the most of the lead in the sum of two matches.
Lantratov also took two penalties at the end from Promes, as best he could. But in the second case, Ilya left the line before the kick, Quincey still scored today. Of course, if Lokomotiv had played better, even with Zobnin’s goal, Galaktionov would have had a comeback chance in such a wild fight. But this is a well-known gray area – “if only”. The main controversial decision was made by the referee with a score of 1:1.
