Former Spartak Forward Criticizes Ivic and Reviews Recent Results
The ex-Spartak attacker Denis Davydov voiced a clear opinion about the club’s coaching situation. He believes that Vladimir Ivic should not be offered the role of head coach again and that his approach would clash with Spartak’s current needs. Davydov pointed out significant mismatches between Ivic’s methods and the style Spartak has developed in recent matches, especially in the clash against Khimki. He argued that Ivic’s presence would disrupt the balance the squad has built, and suggested that his return would not benefit the team or the city’s football culture. Davydov emphasized that Spartak would be better off moving forward with more compatible leadership rather than clinging to a familiar name from the past.
According to the former player, the recent performances show a lingering gap between the club’s expectations and its on pitch execution. He described the Khimki game as an example where the game plan did not translate into effectiveness, noting that Khimki executed their plan with precision and confidence. Davydov believed that the team needed a coach who could harmonize players and system, and he singled out the impact a coach can have on morale and cohesion during tough sequences in the season. The sentiment expressed was that Spartak should consider fresh leadership that aligns with a contemporary football philosophy rather than reverting to previous arrangements that did not yield the desired stability.
Davydov also commented on the broader coaching landscape, stating that Khimki’s success in the match served as a reminder of how tactical flexibility and motivational leadership can drive results. He praised Khimki for their performance and noted that their progress suggested they could challenge for higher placements in the standings. In Davydov’s view, Spartak should evaluate their options carefully and seriously consider cultivating a long term plan that features a coach who can cultivate a strong, unified playing style while developing younger talents within the squad.
At the time of Davydov’s remarks, Spartak had a new interim figure guiding the team. Spaniard Guillermo Abascal had taken the helm, bringing a different perspective and a fresh set of ideas. Davydov did not object to the change itself, but he consistently argued that the choice of a coach should be guided by compatibility with the squad’s strengths and the club’s strategic goals. The discussion around leadership at Spartak reflected a broader conversation in Russian football about how to balance experience with modern tactical trends while maintaining a clear identity on the pitch.
Earlier in the season, Spartak endured a setback in a clash with Fakel Voronezh, which ended with a 0–2 defeat at a venue in Moscow. The result added fuel to debates about the direction of the club and the adequacy of the coaching setup. After this round, the team found themselves in a mid-table position, with 31 points recorded. The league table continued to evolve as rival teams registered results that shaped the championship race. The standings highlighted a shift at the top, with Zenit overtaking the field after a win against Ural to reach 40 points. Krasnodar trailed by a single point, while Dinamo closed the top three with 38 points, underscoring how competitive the league had become as the season moved forward.
In this context, Davydov’s reflections touched on the importance of leadership decisions that influence not just results but the overall confidence within the squad. He suggested that Spartak’s management should consider a coach whose philosophy aligns with the club’s history and its aspirations for a strong domestic performance, as well as a credible challenge in European competitions if opportunities arise in the future. The conversation around Ivic’s dismissal, the interim appointment, and the path ahead remained a talking point among fans and analysts who watch the team closely as they navigate the rest of the campaign. The ongoing narrative stressed the need for stability, a clear tactical plan, and a sense of unity that could translate into consistent performances across tournaments.