- We caught up four times, kept the intrigue, and that’s a lot. Along the way, they lost key players and a lot of energy and did not defend themselves as they should against a key throw. Batiste scored the decisive, after which the game ended.
“Do you agree that there was not enough time to be saved?”
- Not at all. The time for both teams is the same, but we spent a lot of effort on the chase. “Bank” at “Panathinaikos” played just great. Not enough one player. Perhaps Vanterpool. Oscar, although it helped tactically and technically, but lost in decisions. And the true leaders proved himself to be Papaloukas. He took the team and led it along. Alas, we were unable to find a combination of five players who would play just like him. Smodis helped him at one time, Langdon helped the other, then Thomas Van den Spiegel joined, who basically defended himself. But there was no full five. We had a great third quarter, and if we had completed two or three attacks there, with plus 4-5 the game would have been completely different.
- You know the players very well. Can you evaluate how hard it was for them to act in such an atmosphere?
- To succumb to public pressure is not for CSKA. Rather, for the referee. Lamonika made some strange decisions in the third quarter. We sat close and saw when he fouled for a light touch to a key basketball player. The mood, of course, is depressed because of all this, but the great team both wins and loses together. We will continue ...
- Do you think the ending was more difficult morally because of these constant pursuits?
- Before Batista scored for us, I thought that we would have won in overtime. It was important to protect oneself or at least foul in the hope that Mike would miss one time. And so I had to count on Langdon's quick throw. In principle, his hand went well, but the ball hit the bow, and ...
Nikolai TSYNKEVICH, Athens