“Vilkov should not serve the central matches of the tour”: Aldonin on ambiguous refereeing in the game “Zenith” - CSKA

- The refereeing of the team of Mikhail Vilkov in the match “Zenith” - CSKA made a lot of noise. How do you rate the work of the arbitrators?

- To put it mildly, ambiguous. I did not understand a few episodes. I have already read many unpleasant reviews of his work, and I think that Vilkov could not cope with it. Firstly, there was a controversial episode with the participation of Fedor Chalov and Vilmar Barrios, when the CSKA striker played hard enough against the Colombian, and he did not leave this situation in the past. Barrios then stepped on Chalov’s foot in midfield, and I don’t think that the army team was somehow simulating in that moment. The camera did not show a repeat, and during the break this case was not discussed.

- Unlike the possible removal of Serdar Azmun, primarily for a foul on Ivan Oblyakov ...

- Yes, they said that a red card is possible there. But I do not think that it could be shown, it was yellow enough. But in the second half, the Iranian striker was supposed to receive a second warning and leave the field.

- Why in this case was not used a video replay?

“It surprises me too.” It often happens that they give a penalty after several game episodes, when it has already been 20 or 30 seconds, and only then the assistants report a violation in the penalty area. But this moment was not worked out by either assistants or Vilkov. We watched this episode in a television studio, and there the judge said that this is generally a direct red card. I repeat that I myself am not sure about this. If Oblyakov had an injury, then, of course, then Azmun should have been removed, since he was playing far from the ball, but intentionally in the foot.

- What do you think about the removal of Yaki Biyola?

“There wasn’t even such a blow there.” Barrios controlled the body of Bijol's body. If we consider the situation as a whole, then the Colombian made a nod down to the ball, and not to the top point. I can’t say with certainty that this was a dangerous game that deserved a yellow card. Moreover, this episode has already been played. Vilkov did not immediately react to him. VAR could not tell him, because it was the second yellow card, and instead, Zenit players helped, who ran up and said that it was a dangerous game. Vilkov had to make a decision himself. The situation was ambiguous.

- Why even with the introduction of VAR errors in Russian football did not become less?

- I think every system needs to be further developed. The main thing is that the human factor does not interfere. With his presence, many mistakes are possible.

- Is it possible to say that even before the match, Vilkov “swam”, because they began to put pressure on him?

“I don’t know, this can only be found out from himself.” It seems to me that his appointment was rather controversial. In my opinion, this is not the referee who should serve the central matches of the tour. It may sound harsh towards Vilkov, but I have such an opinion.

- Do not you think that the current head of the refereeing and inspection department of the RFU, Alexander Egorov, may lose his post this way? Many clubs publicly made claims against him ...

- Speaking specifically about this match, we have the following: there was a controversial appointment of Vilkov, he did not do the job, and for the army there was an acceptable result - a draw in St. Petersburg. Egorov should be asked why Vilkov spent five minutes to show the second yellow card to Biyolu. I myself would be interested in listening to their explanations of how he appreciated the work of Vilkov. Claims to refereeing have always been and will be. You just have to have quality referees who can serve big matches.

- Who is included in this category of judges, in your opinion?

- I do not want to give the names. It should be those referees who serve the Champions League matches and national teams tournaments. If we had more than one, not two, but more, there would be fewer questions for refereeing.

- If we ignore refereeing, then the outcome of the match turned out to be logical?

- CSKA had a good match, even ten of them. CSKA chose the best option for organizing the game, acted quite tightly and strictly on the defensive, not forgetting about fast oncoming attacks. There were several points in the first half, we scored one goal after a mistake by the defender of Zenit. Nevertheless, CSKA was waiting for its chance. In the second half, Zenit was able to play efficiently without deletion.

- Although the army team suffered from refereeing, can they be satisfied with the result?

- In general, they can record this match as an asset. The game was good from the point of view of both the organization and the work done by the players. We played in principle with high quality and disciplined. It is clear that Zenit had a tremendous advantage, this was expected before the match. But in general, they were not given the opportunity to turn around.