[ad_1]
Football.ua evaluates the actions of the players of the Ukrainian national team in the test match against Poland.
Ukraine’s team on the eve of the final two Nations League matches against Germany and Switzerland lost to Poland (0: 2). It is true that, despite the defeat, Andriy Shevchenko was satisfied with the quality of the game of his players.
“The only thing I’m not happy with today is the result. We showed very good football, but we didn’t have enough opportunities. We made two mistakes and we paid a lot for them. This is football, there is no drama. I am satisfied with it. I play and with my players. ” If we do not take the result into account, I will definitely record today’s match as positive. Today we try to balance the squad, we have important games ahead of us. From a friendly play point of view, we received important information, and I see no reason to give a general assessment. “, – said the mentor at the post-match press conference.
Indeed, the “blue-yellow” played in a combinatorial manner in a positional attack, creating much more than the hosts of the match. Football.ua evaluates the actions of the players of the Ukrainian national team on a 10-point scale.
Andrey Lunin – 4.5. For the first time, fans of the national team saw the young goalkeeper in action in 3.5 months. That is what Lunin did not play in official matches, the last time the goalkeeper entered the field on July 20 against Elche. Lunin didn’t have much work in yesterday’s game – six shots on goal. One, it seemed, was a good save, when Přemyslav Placheta shot from the corner of the penalty area into the far corner. Andrey played well with his feet on a short medium pass, but there is a “but”! Lunin’s flagrant error at the start greased the entire game of the goalkeeper, whom many expected to see on the field. Incidentally, Shevchenko suggested that perhaps the quality of the turf played a role in Andrei’s failed one-touch elimination. The main thing now is to recover psychologically quickly.
Efim Konoplya – 5.5. Shevchenko has only one left back nominally on the right flank of the defense: Efim Konoplya of Desna. For this reason, the coaching staff gave the young footballer 63 minutes of play. Hemp was good defensively. Also keep in mind that Zelinski was playing on the left in Poland’s midfield, Piontek was constantly on the left. However, Yefim did not always join the attack with great quality. Especially in the first half. Several potentially dangerous attacks by the Ukrainian national team were interrupted due to inaccurate overhangs / shots from the defender. It’s true that with a transfer in the second half, Hemp could strike out the entire first half of the game. In the 52nd minute, Efim traditionally came on the attack and dived superbly under Tsygankov’s blow into the zone slightly above the 11-meter mark, but the Poland goalkeeper parried Viktor’s kick in a jump.
Sergey Krivtsov – 6.0. The Shakhtar defender played his first game after COVID-19 and looked great. The central defender made no serious positional errors and won the fight on the second floor. The only thing that can be criticized for Krivtsov is not always the precise vertical and diagonal passes in the initial phase of the attack.
Nikolay Matvienko – 6.0. A similar situation occurs with the second central defender, Nikolai Matvienko. It makes no sense to blame them for the moment with the two goals from the Poles. Yes, it was Matvienko who threw the ball to the leg crying at the moment with the second goal, which has already made a cross to the far post. Perhaps in this episode Nikolai could have played better. But overall, Matvienko produced a very solid match.
Bogdan Mikhailichenko – 5.5. It seems that the entire first half Mikhaylichenko ran into the attack to no avail. The left flank was completely invisible. In the second half, Bogdan started bringing balls to Viktor Tsygankov more often. There was more interaction in the offensive phase, or something like that. In terms of defense, there can be no complaints against Mikhailichenko.
Evgeny Makarenko – 6.0. Makarenko formally replaced Stepanenko in her post, but performed entirely different functions. Eugene was tasked with initiating the team’s attacks, which he dealt with. Only once did Makarenko make a very serious mistake in the first half in the first phase of building an attack, but the central defenders corrected his teammate’s mistake.
Viktor Kovalenko – 5.5. The Shakhtar midfielder spent 76 minutes on the pitch, after which he was substituted. Kovalenko did a lot of execution work, which remained behind the scenes. Hence the feeling: “Was he even on the football field?” But, in fairness, it’s worth saying that I’d like to see more grievances in Victor’s attack. His role was rather reduced to passing on to his neighbor, and it was Makarenko or Zinchenko.
Alexander Zinchenko – 7.5. The City midfielder is probably one of the best on the field in yesterday’s game. Someone will say that Alejandro “made a difference” and they will be right. In the presence of Kovalenko and Makarenko, Zinchenko placed a bit higher in the triangle. Several times Alexander was very good at getting the ball between the lines and dispersing the team’s attacks. Zinchenko moved closer to the right flank, where he consistently outscored Yarmolenko and Yaremchuk. Alexander had a very high quality match, although he only played 56 minutes.
Andriy Shevchenko eliminated all three attacking midfielders during the break. After the game, the mentor called his pre-planned substitutions.
Andrey Yarmolenko – 7.0. Yarmolenko managed to win a penalty in 45 minutes and did not convert it. However, in addition to this, Andrey, along with Zinchenko, was the most noticeable in the attack. Ukraine often launched its attacks from the right flank. Yarmolenko had no qualms about playing the game and also gave sharp passes. Remember how Yarmolenko, Zinchenko and Yaremchuk played a triangle on the right edge of the penalty area. It is true that Andrey’s pass under attack to Yaremchuk failed.
Alexander Zubkov – 4.5. If Yarmolenko was noticed in the attack, then Zubkov, apparently, donned an invisibility cloak. Alexander was not visible at all during the first half of the attack. The only explanation for this: Zinchenko was constantly approaching the right edge, and the ball rarely reached the left flank of the attack.
Roman Yaremchuk – 5.5. The Ghent striker constantly fought against the Polish defenders, played successfully with his teammates, but created no real opportunities for himself. The only thing Yaremchuk remembered were two weak shots, which the Poland goalkeeper easily dealt with.
Marlos – 6.5. The midfielder appeared in the second half and added sharp passes in the final third. Marlos constantly shifted from his nominal position as a right attacking midfielder and appeared in search of the ball at different points on the field. It was Marlos who became the author of an excellent split pass, which put Viktor Tsygankov one on one with the goalkeeper.
Victor Tsygankov – 7.5. Tsygankov entered the game excellently from the bench, immediately added dynamics in the final third and also had some very good scoring opportunities. The first is a blow after a Hemp lumbago. The second is the one-on-one with the goalkeeper after a pass from Marlos. We wrote about all of this above. Tsygankov beat his opponents heavily on the left flank of the attack, winning free throws near Poland’s 16-meter zone. The only thing missing was a scored goal, and Victor was very close to that.
Junior Moraes – 5.5. Moraes got out and disappeared onto the soccer field. It was difficult for the striker in fighting the opponent’s oversized defenders, but Junior performed well in the game. However, Moraes did not have a single moment, he did not create anything for the partners.
Valery Bondar – 5.5. Nominally, the Shakhtar central defender came out unexpectedly down the right in defense. It seems Shevchenko had no choice, and the rest of Konoply before the League of Nations was necessary. Cooper wasn’t afraid to join the attack, but he was of little use.
Igor Kharatin – 5.5. The defensive midfielder came in in the 56th minute in place of Aleksandr Zinchenko, who was much closer to the rival penalty area. Kharatin’s departure instead of Alexander seemed strange. The functionality of the players is radically different. As a result, the Ferencfaros midfielder did not give the team any quality in attack.
Shevchenko’s last substitution was the departure of Sergei Sidorchuk in the 76th minute of the match in place of Kovalenko. Thus, the Ukrainian team ended the match with three defenders on the field. Sidorchuk did not have time to be remembered for his vivid actions.
Do you want to be the first to know the main football news? Subscribe to our channel on Telegram! You can also follow our website at Facebook, Instagram Y Twitter.
[ad_2]
