Although there are arguments in favor of dismissal.

On the eve of the Moscow derby, things are not so calm for Spartak’s prospects: the team has had a fever since the beginning of the season, but if in the first rounds the “red-whites” still won, now the fragile balance it was broken. Guillermo Abascal’s resignation has been talked about for several days now. Let’s discuss the arguments of each part.

For resignation. Constant questions about rotation

Initially, the most interesting question is: why does Ruslan Litvinov play as a central defender and not as a defensive midfielder? Another question was subsequently added: why was he put on the bench for his only mistake against Ural, while Denisov played regularly? Or why Roman Zobnin still appears in the starting lineup, although there is someone who showed himself well in the Prutsev Cup?

Abascal does not dare leave the experienced managers of the “red-whites” in reserve for the championship matches. Georgiy Dzhikia only recently gave way to Srdjan Babic, but sometimes it is useful to put Quincy Promes on the bench: yes, the Dutchman brought the Muscovites a cup victory over Paris NN, but before that there was an extremely in the match media against Krasnodar.

Against. Another perestroika

Of course, if there are obvious signs of disease, it is better not to delay treatment. On the other hand, look at how much the masters of Spartak invested in strengthening this summer. The team signed Jesus Medina, Theo Bongonda, Ryabchuk, Babich – in total they spent around 24 million euros. All these acquisitions are for Abascal football. And what would happen if the Spaniard resigned? Not just yet another search for a coach, but also major new expenses.

A striking example is when, after Oleg Kononov, who played with two central defenders, Tedesco arrived with three, and after Domenico’s departure, Rui Vitoria was appointed. The switch to two central defenders began again. But the mentor did not get artists for his football and failed. Still?

For resignation. The same rake

Although Abascal shows no signs of improvement. Last spring, the coach’s main vice manifested itself: throwing himself into crisis situations. So he constantly mixed schemes and combinations, now he could not choose the main pair of central defenders.

For the most important match against Zenit, he suddenly abandoned the basic 4-3-3 and tried the 4-3-1-2 diamond in the center again. Players unprepared for drastic changes predictably failed.

Guillermo has many ideas for each match: triangles on the flanks, the same diamond shape, a formation of three central defenders. But they all manifest themselves in impulses and are not systemic in nature. And so it takes players longer to get used to new roles than to realize the idea. It’s not a question of consistency.

Against. There are no clear alternatives to continue the path

Continuing the previous counterargument. Perhaps you could opt for a coaching reshuffle, otherwise the consequences could be fatal. But Abascal should only be fired if there is a candidate who continues the expected path. There are no such things on the Russian market.

Although in the storm of fleeting ideas it is already difficult to understand what the philosophy of “Spartak” Abaskal is.

For resignation. Too much influence in the club

During the winter the Spanish coach indirectly clashed with sporting director Paul Ashworth. The English coach tried to bring defensive midfielder Maksimovic from Getafe, but Guillermo wanted a more sophisticated player for this role, while Nemanja didn’t know how to play a pass. Subsequently, representatives of Abascal promoted the candidacy of Tomas Tavares.

In the summer the same agents brought Theo Bongonda into the team. This isn’t bad: Tomas made the difference when he was healthy, Theo is now falling apart in free space.

Only the mentor has more and more influence in the club – because Ashworth is not in good standing (hence the rumors about the refusal to sell Denisov to Lille for 11 million euros), since Lukoil has no experience in football management. The latter can only trust the Spaniard in football matters and finance the strengthening.

When an experienced specialist who has been working here for a long time has such weight in a club, there are no questions, but Guillermo has only been in Moscow for a year.

Against. Failures are not hopeless

At the beginning of the season there was a streak of five consecutive victories and the Muscovites played decently, although not without flaws. At Rubin, Abascal prepared a perfectly functional setup with triangles on the flank, forming the laterals, wings and interiors. Another question is that he did not find a continuation – and against Ural and Zenit, Spartak played in a different format.

An excellent starting line-up was chosen for the cup match against Dynamo and everyone played very well, winning 4:1. There were no questions about moving the ball or playing without it. It’s just that the mentor should keep experiments at bay, find working levers and develop them – and abandon excessive stubbornness, which led to the defeats of Ural and Zenit.

Bottom line. Getting involved in perestroika without a plan is as bad as inaction

Because the problems under Abascal are visible now, and the consequences of a rash resignation will appear later. The ideal scenario is that if the Moscow leadership selects candidates and appoints a new coach before the winter break, he will have time for a full retreat. Otherwise castling will do more harm than good. Spartak’s bosses know this better than anyone.