There is nothing reprehensible in the coaching desire to think about your team. It is only important not to cross the line beyond which the respect for the players develops in their teacher into an overestimated self-esteem.
If Guus Hiddink completed the roster for the game against the Dutch solely on the basis of his desire to bring him as close as possible to the option that will be in demand in Estonia in March, this is not so bad. But if the coach considered that the Russian team had already moved so far in mastering the game principles and ideas that he proposed that he could afford to act on the basis of these same principles, and not on the opponent’s characteristics, whoever he was, this is a real danger of breaking his neck .
Let us explain our concerns. It seemed that in February Amsterdam Hiddink was going to play in the same vein as in November Skopje. And, probably, in March Tallinn. Consideration of the performers chosen by him convinced that the roster was “imprisoned” for the offensive game, from the position of strength and creation. The pre-game study of the starting list did generate a hunch about the scheme with three defenders, which on the eve ruined the youth team in Groningen. However, the fourth defense player - Zhirkov, who played unusually “low” on the left, quickly showed up. Not to say that Yuri failed his section of the front. On the other edge, the whole match was, perhaps, hotter than on the flank of him. The point is different. The bet on Zhirkov and Anyukov as extreme defenders betrayed Hiddink’s intention to play the wrong football at all.
Sharp flank teeth (here's the fork) turned out to be unclaimed. The first and only really sharp attack of Zhirkov in the episode of the return goal was ripening for too long - the score was already 0: 2 by that time. Perhaps this is an acceptable fee for testing a non-standard option for using an army man if this option is useful in other circumstances. But Hiddink has yet to be convinced of his critics by future results.
In the meantime, in the context of a specific match, the national team for two halves was driven into the trenches of a deaf defense, and even in the absence of poor fellow Ignashevich. And here it seemed to be a much more practical move to preserve at least the verified fraternal bunch of the Berezutsky (this is your spoon). For by the middle of the first half, it became clear that in this match we will not be up to elevated attacking feelings. Periodically included in the hosts pressure, coupled with a crowded orange offensive across the entire width of the lawn, did not allow the Russians to raise their heads. The middle triangle of Semshov-Bilyaletdinov-Titov was completely unprepared for such a turn of events. Opponents did not give them a chance to catch on the ball.
The Dutch lack of real scoring chances generated only the illusion of well-being. It was hard to believe that our team, depleted in substandard off-season conditions, would withstand this methodical pressure. Bilyaletdinov’s pre-injury injury seemed to give reason to “move the chips” much more actively than the coaching staff did, sending Sychev to the field. With all the wealth of imagination, it is impossible to imagine how such a replacement increased the reliability of the rear. Alas, she did not add sharpness to the attacks either.
But Marco van Bastin with substitutions during the break actually made the game. Snyder and Babel became those weights that moved the scales in the direction the Dutch needed. By the way, they scored their balls with shots from medium distances, which were preceded by episodes of Aldonin's flagrant confusion. Another player who entered the game from the reserve, and extremely out of place.
The sad paradox was that a bunch of two oporniks, which had been abruptly formed during the second half, played an order of magnitude less reliably than Semshov alone. It seems that the appearance of Aldonin knocked down some subtle settings, destroyed the established stereotypes of interactions: the defense lost hopelessly in the central zone in front of the penalty area. There, in addition, Kolodin and Alexei Berezutsky, who in their hearts were replaced by their brother immediately after the first goal, were suddenly confused as a child. And Akinfeev’s long lack of demand with growing nervous tension also came sideways - both deciding the outcome of the blow seemed to come from. At least the goalkeeper of the top level, to which Igor has already been ranked ...
Friendly matches are practical in that their plots can be perceived as completely finished and not necessarily necessarily continued in the cross section of official tournaments. We moved through the maze into an unknown corridor, buried our forehead against the wall - and well. More than a step there. Thank you for science.
Only somehow it was not at all practical, but perhaps ominously flashed from the rostrum at the end of the match the smile of Vitaly Mutko caught in the telephoto lens. Oleg Romantsev smiled like that - in Japan, at the failed World Cup. With all the difference in situations of smiles, these expressed about one thing: it’s not me - they are all.
Not even an hour, grabbing the sharp. And you certainly can’t scoop a knife out of a plate ...
Sergey NOVIKOV
HOLLAND - RUSSIA - 4: 1 (0: 0)
Goals: 1: 0 - Babel (68), 2: 0 - Snyder (71), 2: 1 - Bystrov (76), 3: 1 - Mataisen (80), 4: 1 - van der Wart (89, penalty) .
HOLLAND: Stekelenburg, Yalins, Mataisen, Bouma, van Bronkhorst (k), de Jong (Mendes da Silva, 63), van der Warth, Landzat (Snyder, 46), Seedorf (Huntelar, 78), Vennegor of Hesselink (de Clair) 78), Kate (Babel, 46).
RUSSIA: Akinfeev, Kolodin, A. Berezutsky (V. Berezutsky, 69), Anyukov, Bystrov, Semshov, Titov (k) (Aldonin, 58), Bilyaletdinov (Sychev, 44), Zhirkov, Saenko, Arshavin (Pavlyuchenko, 72) .
Warning: V. Berezutsky (90).
February 7th. Amsterdam. Arena. 22.30.
Judge: Mark Clattenburg (England).