About conditionality of forecasts
I know that many experts before the match “Zenith” - “Spartak” preferred the owners. Of course, for them, and for me, including, the victory of Spartak was somewhat unexpected. But, despite the result, the opinion of experts before the game was quite justified. Yes, Zenit really had more chances to beat Spartak - for various reasons. Zenit made several high-profile transfers and, in general, seemed to be better at the championship. Plus, Spartak played an unimpressive match of the previous round with Amkar. That is, the experts had in mind the chances, and not the obligatory victory of Zenit. But the Petersburgers did not use their chances and lost to Spartak, who had better prepared for a particular match. The team physically and tactically competently built the game, the coaches chose the right composition and reasonably distributed the functions.
About old and new friends of Tymoshchuk
I don’t think that the reason for the defeat of “Zenith” is in too many new players, some of whom did not spend all their pre-season training with the team, such as Tymoshchuk or Zyryanov. Skilled players tend to quickly find a common language. Time is not always the most important criterion. Here, as in life, in human communication. Suppose people have known each other for many years, communicate, but still do not understand each other. And vice versa: you only get acquainted with a person and find out that your tastes coincide in many ways. It is the same in football. If the same Tymoschuk suits Zenit, then for understanding with partners time is not so important.
About chess
Football is such a game that the right tactics are not always the key to a successful result. Otherwise, football would become close to chess. It happens that the coach correctly set everyone up, came up with a good game plan, and the player at the decisive moment missed the target. It is said, of course, approximately and perhaps primitively, but not far from the truth. Matches such as Zenit - Spartak, of course, are principled and say a lot, but you can still make any global conclusions only after a sufficiently large number of games.
About army deja vu
In a match between CSKA and Lokomotiv, a lot of things were decided by the ball scored in the first minute. After the goal of Ramon, CSKA became less likely to go on the attack and defend with great strength. “Lokomotiv” most of the first half besieged the opponent’s goal, the army team managed only rare sorties. I think we saw such a game due to the fact that, on the one hand, the army team gave the initiative, and on the other, Lokomotiv had a better ball. If CSKA could succeed in quick counterattacks in such a defensive game, then we could talk about the advantage of this team. But Loko did not allow counter-attacks. In this game we can say that the army team defended themselves skillfully. The last time CSKA played like this in its best season - the 2005 championship, when it restrained attacks, leading the score. In the match with Lokomotiv, CSKA coped with the tasks that the team had after a quick goal: to play solidly on the defensive and attack aggressively.
About Grigoriev instead of brothers
The young defender Anton Grigoryev left a good impression, with the exception of a few points. Once he was unable to make a quick decision in front of his goal, and he was covered, then there was an episode when he did not very successfully take the ball out of the box. This honors the army team - they beat a strong opponent without four base players, when the entire match was played by a player from the backup squad. CSKA won without the Berezutsky brothers' full-time defenders, and in the match against Lokomotiv this is especially significant. The team was able to make up for such a loss by playing against one of its main competitors. This is an important indicator of the class.