A prominent Russian football commentator and TV presenter, Dmitry Guberniev, commented on the decision of the Control and Disciplinary Committee of the Russian Football Union to fine Lokomotiv Moscow striker Artem Dziuba 50,000 rubles and to conditionally suspend him for two matches due to the use of harsh language. The note about the ruling was reported by Sport Express.
Guberniev noted that if Dziuba continues along this path, the conditional ban could become a real disqualification. He emphasized that Dziuba had been given a chance to reflect and change his behavior. The commentator questioned whether such disciplinary measures impact journalists working with football players and reminded that there are many football stories that often go unpunished.
The incident unfolded after a journalist asked Dziuba whether he felt offended by remarks made by the Russian coach Igor Shalimov, who predicted that the striker would not score more than two goals in the current season. In response, Dziuba told the journalist to stay on task and warned that he would place his phone somewhere to prevent further contact. He added that if the journalist returned, it would be the last warning he would issue.
Dziuba joined Lokomotiv in February 2023. In May, he signed a new contract with the club, which includes an option to extend for one more year through the end of the 2023/24 season.
Pavel Stipidi, a former expert, suggested that Dziuba might not learn anything from this exchange with a journalist. The commentary surrounding the incident reflects ongoing tensions between players and media, as well as the evolving standards for decorum in post-match and public discourse across Russian football.
The disciplinary decision places Dziuba under a probationary period that allows the league to assess future behavior. Supporters of the ruling argue that it sends a clear message about professional conduct, while critics question whether the punishment aligns with other comparable cases within the sport. The episode has sparked broader discussions about the responsibilities of players when engaging with media, and about the appropriate boundaries between athletes, coaches, and journalists during interviews and public appearances.
Analysts note that Lokomotiv’s management will likely monitor Dziuba for signs of remorse and improved conduct. The team has expressed public commitment to upholding standards of respect and sportsmanship inside and outside the pitch, while fans and observers watch closely how the player responds to the verdict and whether this incident affects his future performance and relationship with media.
In the broader context of Russian football, the incident underscores ongoing conversations about accountability in the locker room, the role of media interactions in shaping public perception, and the balance between competitive passion and measured communication. The case also highlights how football clubs and governing bodies enforce rules designed to maintain a respectful environment for players, staff, and those who cover the sport.
For Lokomotiv, the immediate task is to move forward with the squad and focus on upcoming fixtures while staying mindful of the rules governing player conduct. For Dziuba, the next steps involve demonstrating professional growth, managing public statements more carefully, and continuing to contribute on the field in a manner that reflects well on himself and the club. The intersections of sport, media, and governance will undoubtedly continue to shape conversations around disciplinary measures and their far-reaching implications for all parties involved.