A former midfielder for the Russian national team and Spartak Moscow, Alexander Mostovoy, voiced firm concerns about how the 2022/23 Russian Cup was organized. He highlighted a surprising rule in the competition that appears to prevent Spartak from being eliminated after a loss, a detail that left him puzzled about the tournament design. His remarks raise a broader question about why the Cup uses a two-legged format in certain rounds and whether such a structure truly serves the competition’s goals.
Mostovoy’s critique focuses on the practical effects of a two-game phase. If a team can be knocked out after one setback, playing twice in a row seems questionable to him. He noted that attention waned during the second half once the rule became clear, prompting doubt about whether two matches are essential to decide progression in early knockout rounds. The comments reflect a clash between traditional expectations and the realities of modern cup formats, where extra fixtures can affect preparation, momentum, and audience engagement.
Fans and analysts continually revisit a central question: could a final feature teams that navigated that two-legged stage in unusual ways? Could Spartak reach the final after a setback that would end their chances in a standard single-elimination setup? Could a club like Ural, which knocked Spartak out of another stage, still advance to the title if the bracket moves in unexpected directions? These are not hypothetical concerns for many observers; they reflect ongoing debates about whether European-style competition formats should be adopted or adapted for the Russian Cup and how those choices influence credibility and excitement for supporters.
Recent events demonstrated the complexity of the Cup’s current layout. Spartak lost 1:2 to Ural in the second leg of the semifinal on the road known as the Russian Cup Road to the Premier League. This result does not automatically remove Spartak from the Cup draw. The Moscow club is reassigned to the Russian Cup Regions Road, where it will face Dynamo/Akron or Krasnodar/Rostov in the next round. The outcome highlights how a two-leg semifinal can impact momentum, rival selection, and the perceived fairness of progression rules as teams move between different routes within the same competition.
Before this leg, the teams met in Moscow with a 1:1 draw. In that match, Quincy Promes opened the scoring for Spartak while Yuri Zheleznov replied for Ural, balancing the score and leaving the tie on a knife edge. Each side carried the memory of that result into the second leg, where strategic approaches and coaching decisions shaped the final outcome beyond the initial draw.
Looking ahead, the next stage promises a clash in the final of the Road to the Premier League between Ural and the winner of the clash between CSKA and Krylya Sovetov. That pairing was still to be decided at the time of the latest games. This setup shows how the competition’s pathways can connect teams in unexpected ways, creating debates about fairness, scheduling, and the overall experience for players and fans in Russia and beyond. Supporters are watching closely to see whether the current structure offers a clear and convincing route to the trophy, or whether adjustments might be considered to align the Cup more closely with traditional knockout logic found in other European leagues. In the meantime, critics and proponents alike will weigh the merits of a two-road format against a straightforward single-elimination path, balancing tradition with contemporary needs in the sport’s competitive landscape. Championship