Difficulties of perestroika: why Karpin does not deserve criticism after matches with Cyprus and Malta

The first matches of the Russian national football team under the leadership of Valery Karpin left an ambiguous impression. On the one hand, the domestic team completed the minimum task and scored seven points in three meetings, drawing with Croatia, as well as beating Cyprus and Malta. Nevertheless, many experts and journalists were unhappy with the performance of the team and rushed to criticize the players and the coach.

Yes, it is quite difficult to find fault with the results, given at least the fact that the team never missed, but the content of the game as a whole left a depressing impression. And if in the match with Croatia many problems - creating dangerous moments, uncoordinated actions in pressing and recurring mistakes in defense - could be attributed to the level of the opponent, then in the two remaining games there was nothing to hide behind. And these meetings left more questions than they answered.

Despite the fact that in both cases the Russian national team won with a difference of two goals, these victories cannot be called confident. For the most part of the second half, the same Cyprus besieged the gates of Marinato Guilherme, although in the end he could not create anything dangerous. And Malta only miraculously did not equalize the score. If it had not been for the save of the Lokomotiv goalkeeper in the 61st minute, it is not known how it would have ended. If we add to this the fact that Davis Manji's wards were practically not inferior in terms of ball possession (47-53), and at times pinned the hosts in their half of the field, then the whistle coming from the stands would become, if not justified, then quite understandable.

Such a negative reaction can be justified by the fact that the level of expectations from the performance of the Russians was quite high. And not only in connection with the relatively successful outcome of the confrontation with Croatia, but also in the light of previous results in matches with less skilled opponents. Over the past few years, the ability to cope with such rivals was considered one of the hallmarks of Stanislav Cherchesov's team. Yes, he was repeatedly criticized for his inability to compete with the top teams, but Artyom Dzyuba and the company dealt with outsiders regularly. Suffice it to recall the qualifying tournament for Euro 2020, during which domestic football players won eight victories without scoring points only in meetings with Belgium.

An additional reason for making comparisons was the fact that under the leadership of Cherchesov, the Russians managed to play both Malta and Cyprus - three times in the last two years. In each of the matches, victories were won, and the total score was 9: 1. And if the first in the opening match of the qualification of the 2022 World Cup resisted, the second first lost with a minimum score in Nizhny Novgorod, and conceded five unanswered goals in their field (albeit remaining in the minority in the 28th minute). What is not a reason to use this as a pretext for criticizing Karpin?

At the same time, few people betrayed the serious importance of the fact that the coaching staff, team leader, captain, scheme and model of the game changed in the Russian national team - they expected no less convincing victories from the team over opponents. And when the extravaganza did not happen, the new mentor was expected to be redeemed in discontent, most of which is hardly justified.

Despite the two-week training camp, it was extremely difficult for Karpin to ensure that the team became a single organism, clearly understood and fulfilled his requirements. The transition to a new formation and the change in philosophy also influenced this. It may seem that the concept has remained the same, but this is not entirely true. Permutations in the composition, in particular, the absence of Dziuba as a system-forming element of Cherchesov's constructions could not but affect the general pattern of the game. Yes, we can say that the team used high pressure before - but not to such an extent. And even more so, such a stake was not made on him.

And taking into account the fact that team pressure is one of the fundamental elements in modern football, and its debugging is a complex and painstaking process, the roughness in the game of the Russian national team should not be surprising. Yes, the same teams from Cyprus and Malta quite often managed to cope with pressure without any problems, which once again speaks of the lack of coordination in the actions of the Russians. However, one should not forget that attempts to cover the opponent when leaving the defense led both to a goal by Fedor Smolov and to the creation of a number of dangerous moments.

Perhaps now the Russian national team has become more vulnerable in meetings with weak opponents, but a bet on modern football may lead to the fact that it becomes more competitive in games with strong opponents. But it was precisely for the inability to impose a fight on equal and superior opponents that Cherchesov was heavily criticized. And here it is worth remembering not only the defeats against Belgium, but also the failures in the matches with Sweden and Serbia in the League of Nations, as well as with Denmark at Euro 2020. In all these cases, Cherchesov's concept did not justify itself, and he did not have a "plan B".

Karpin is not doing well with "plan A" either, but this is still forgivable, given the lack of time, injuries and not the best physical condition of a number of performers. Do not forget that after the meeting with Croatia, the team lost Mario Fernandez and Alexei Ionov (the latter nevertheless recovered to play with Malta), and subsequently lost Alexander Golovin. In addition, Oleksiy Miranchuk, whose failures in the national team were associated exclusively with the figure of the ex-mentor, does not yet justify the status of the leader. The Atalanta midfielder has a solid base, but does he live up to the specialist's confidence? At certain moments, he demonstrates his talent, but he does it rather episodically, which is clearly not enough.

And what about the rest?

Smolov returned to the squad after a long break and chalked up a goal and two assists - more than a decent result.

Arsen Zakharyan made his debut in the team and left a generally good impression of himself, the same can be said about Maxim Osipenko.

Alexander Erokhin confirmed that he is in good shape and can become a strengthening for the base, and Rifat Zhemaletdinov and Zelimkhan Bakaev were productive, leaving the bench.

Only Ilya Samoshnikov and Denis Cheryshev left an ambiguous impression.

The first has not yet been able to get used to the team, and the second - to return to the previous level.

Either way, the September qualifier meetings clearly demonstrated several things.

Firstly, Karpin has a clear understanding of exactly how the national team should play, and has already managed to convey this to the athletes. Secondly, the new coach is not afraid to experiment with the line-up and intends to proceed from the current state of the performers, and not from their status, regalia and merit. Thirdly, the style promoted by him meets the modern trends of football and looks much more promising in confrontations with strong opponents.

Now one of the main questions is whether Karpin will be able to balance his style sharpened under pressure and make sure that the Russian team does not have to both overwork and fight off massive attacks for long periods of time (as in the matches with Cyprus and Malta) ... After all, the lion's share of criticism against him was caused not by rare dangerous moments at the gate of Guilherme, but by those episodes when the team was out of the ball and allowed itself to be squeezed into the penalty area. And if now everything worked out, then next time it may turn out less well.

Of course, one should not expect positional attacks on the other side and combinations in the style of Manchester City and Barcelona of the best years from the Russian national team.

The team simply does not have players capable of providing control at the proper level.

Any attempts to act in this vein will rather lead to losses and dangerous counter-attacks than to create chances at the opponent's goal.

But there are other ways not to lose the initiative, while not opening the rear.

Perhaps Karpin will be able to adapt the ideas of Zinedine Zidane, who, due to passive possession of the ball, balanced the game of Real Madrid and gave his players the opportunity to take breaks between periods of active pressure.

In this case, there will be much fewer episodes similar to those that were at the end of the match with Cyprus.

In a word, it is too early to draw conclusions about the work of the new head coach. The beginning of his work in the Russian national team turned out, albeit not ideal, but rather successful. The team still shares the first place in Group H with Croatia, yielding to it only in additional indicators, and, albeit not with maximum speed, but developing. Whether this is the right path, and whether Karpin's ideas are suitable for domestic footballers, only time will tell.