Football. Ua about the critical situation in the Dynamo and ways to solve it.

There is no doubt that the management of the club by Igor Surkis and his team is not perfect: there is no normal work with the fans, the club site makes people laugh at all sorts of nonsense, and Surkis tries to share his opinion about how many forwards should go out at the start. And this global problem (which uniquely exists), closes the smaller one, but one that directly affects the result - the head coach's persona.

Among the advanced users, those who are accustomed to looking at things globally, it is customary to fire first of all Surkis, exposing Rebrov as a kind of victim of circumstances. Like, if not Surkis with his "professionals" who do not give the coach life, then everything would be normal. But the fact remains - Rebrov is not a Dynamo level coach.

Is this Surkis telling Rebrov how to conduct training: how much to work with the ball, and how many without a ball or how many winter matches to hold control matches? No. Does this Surkis choose the main lineup for the game? Hardly. This Surkis told Rebrov that he should send Teodorchik, and instead take Gladky? Now there is an opinion that Gladky and Gromov are the creatures of Raul Riancho - then also the question to Rebrov - so who in the team was the head coach and for whom the last word?.

Or maybe Surkis does not pay salaries to players, or can salaries be small? Maybe this is the problem? Maybe the guys for six months did not receive wages, as anywhere in Lutsk or Poltava? By the way, Poltava, who did not receive a salary for half a year, beat the Dynamo in Kiev 2: 0. Do you remember how Dynamo could hardly crawl across the field, as if they were them, and not Shakhtar with a big margin in the first place? By the way, who is responsible for the morale-volitional qualities of the team, who should morally tune the players? Too Surkis?.

With all the shortcomings of Igor Mikhailovich, he does the most important thing - he finances the team. His employees - drunk, fed, fattened, receive high salaries (although not the same as before), but at the same time, Surkovis is to blame for everything, and Rebrov is simply a victim of the president-tyrant?.

But, if you answer all the above questions, the main drawback of Surkis is that he pathologically does not know how to choose coaches. On the emotions, Mikhailichenko removed, under which the team successfully (although not in the same way as under Lobanovsky) and regularly played in the Champions League group. For all thirteen years after the departure of Mikhailichenko, Dynamo had only one relatively successful period at the first arrival of Yuri Semin. At the same time Surkis rushed from the choleric Szabo, who was appointed head coach in all incomprehensible situations to the phlegmatic Demianenko, who, of course, is a good guy and a cool former football player, but no more. Trainer can be appointed using different criteria, but Surkis used only one - the presence of "Dynamo's heart". Everyone except Semin and Gazzaev had it.

Similarly, the Ribra was appointed. Did Rebrov somewhere worked before the Dynamo and showed his skills in order to get the opportunity to coach such a team like Dynamo? No. Did the Dynamo show any progress in three years at Rebrov? Well, if you compare it with Blokhin, then probably yes. But is the Blokhin period not considered to be one of the worst in the history of Dynamo, is the low comparative base an excuse to say that everything is fine now? Yes, at Rebrov Dynamo won the championship twice and this was the reason even in the absence of the game to keep Rebrov head coach, but the Dynamo has frankly failed: 1. The last Champions League, 2. The current championship (the second place is not failure, the failure is the gap between Dynamo and Shakhtar), 3. Transfer campaign - okay, let's leave Theodorchik alone with Gladkiy - is it really so sad in Dinamo with young students that we have to invite such frankly mediocre football players as Kadar and Pantich?.

And most importantly - try now to recall at least one game Dynamo, from which you really enjoyed, where Rebro's team played well, and not exhausted. Everton, Besiktas - all. Over the past six months, the situation has deteriorated so much that even blatant failures, like the defeat at home from Shakhtar 3: 4, are presented as a successful game Dynamo, and someone sees in it an element of progress.

Having an example of the same Sanzhar who loses the best football players every six months, but again and again "makes" a team that gives everyone a fight or a Vernadub who has the same situation, call Rebrov the Dynamo level coach and continue to believe in him, while blaming him In all Surkis, is not even funny. By the way, in the last round of Dynamo was on the verge of losing points after another nondescript game with Olimpic - Besedin's goal in the time added by the referee gave Rebrov another week, for which he had to cheer the team. But the Dynamo again took to the field and so continued to aimlessly wander the field without going to the run. Obviously, Rebrov does not have control over the situation, and he again returns to the usual - "bad field", "the players did not hear me," "we will understand" and other preparations.

Championship failed - the new head coach would have a great opportunity to prepare for this next season - to weed out those who are not motivated, to pull up those who will run, and not walk around the field (by the way, when the game does not go Quartz recommends riding. E, which metaphorically means - "at least just try").

Now Surkis has a great opportunity to make his first successful managerial move during his entire stay in Dynamo - to dismiss Rebrov and responsibly approach the choice of a new coach, not paying attention - he used to play in Dynamo or not.

Alexander Osirny, Football. Ua.