Former Rostov defender Vitaly Dyakov shared his take on the two-match disqualification of Spartak Moscow head coach Guillermo Abascal following the incident in the 17th round of the Russian Premier League against Akhmat Grozny. Dyakov argues that Abascal’s actions were provoked by the atmosphere surrounding the moment, while also pointing to the broader tension within the match as a factor that fueled the reactions on the field. The remarks were reported by vprognosis as part of a wider discussion among observers about responsibility and discipline in high-stakes games.
According to Dyakov, Abascal’s conduct reflected the pressure coach and players alike place on a game that always seems to tilt toward drama. He suggested that while a coach is expected to maintain composure, the surrounding events can trigger a charged response, and that such reactions ripple through the entire team. Dyakov acknowledged that Berisha’s later action was unacceptable, noting that Abascal had already realized the severity and inappropriateness of the moment. In his view, Berisha’s conduct warranted serious sanctions as well because it compounded the disruption in the technical area.
The incident occurred in the first half when Abascal, the Spanish manager of Spartak, was sent off after shoving Grozny defender Bernard Berisha, who charged into the Spartak technical area in celebration. The referee issued a caution at the time, and no further punitive action was taken for that specific moment. Abascal subsequently issued an apology for his behavior, expressing regret for letting the situation escalate and for the reaction it provoked within the team and the crowd.
On 7 December, the Control and Disciplinary Committee of the Russian Football Union formally disqualified Abascal for two matches and one additional game to be served as a postponed fixture, a decision that underscored the seriousness with which league authorities viewed on-field confrontations and the need to uphold disciplinary standards regardless of context. This ruling added another chapter to the ongoing debate about how refereeing and disciplinary proceedings should balance accountability with the dynamics that naturally unfold during tense matches.
Earlier, notable football insider Vasily Utkin had described the situation as a “hopeless scenario” for Abascal, highlighting the broader narrative surrounding his leadership during difficult periods. The surrounding discourse reflects a wider concern among supporters and pundits about how clubs manage discipline, player conduct, and coaching comportment when results are under pressure and emotions run high. The series of events serves as a reminder that leadership on the sidelines carries consequences that extend beyond a single moment in play, influencing team morale, fan perception, and the perceived integrity of the competition. The episode thus becomes a focal point for discussions about accountability, the accountability mechanisms of the RFU KDK, and how future infractions might be deterred through clear, consistent enforcement of rules across teams and leagues.