Spartak Moscow’s Defensive Concerns Under Scrutiny Ahead of Grozny Akhmat Clash
Vladimir Ponomarev, a former CSKA and USSR national team defender, offered pointed commentary on Spartak Moscow’s defensive setup as they prepare for a sixth-round encounter with Grozny Akhmat in the Russian Premier League. Reported by Euro-Football.Ru, his remarks highlight a recurring concern that has shadowed the team early in the season and now takes on added significance with the upcoming test against a counter-pressing opponent.
According to Ponomarev, Spartak have appeared to draw lessons after a visibly awkward display against Ural. He described the performance as incongruous for a club with Spartak’s storied history. The defender cited miscommunication between Litvinov and Svinov at the moment the third goal went in as emblematic of broader issues, and he questioned Jikia’s decision in that moment. The sentiment extended to general evaluation of the squad’s leadership, with Abascal under pressure to deliver results to keep the season moving in a positive direction.
Earlier in the campaign, in the fourth round, Guillermo Abascal’s squad lost 2-3 on the road at Ural Yekaterinburg. The critical moment arose from a sequence of disjointed movements between goalkeeper Ilya Svinov and defender Ruslan Litvinov, which allowed the home side to seize the initiative and tilt the match in their favor. The episode amplified ongoing discussions around defensive communication and organizational discipline, topics that have accompanied Spartak’s season at multiple junctures.
So far in the domestic championship, Spartak has secured three wins and two defeats from five rounds, collecting nine points and occupying sixth place as the campaign unfolds. In the group stage of the Russian Cup, Abascal’s team has already recorded two victories in the opening rounds, suggesting potential momentum as the league resumes its rhythm and the competition grows more demanding. The balance between attacking intent and defensive solidity remains a central question for the squad and its leadership, especially amid a schedule that tests fitness, coordination, and tactical clarity.
Prolonged debate about Spartak’s direction has moved beyond tactics into discussions about leadership culture and staff choices guiding the squad. Ponomarev’s critique aligns with a wider conversation on the impact of foreign expertise shaping a club’s defensive structure and overall approach. As the season unfolds, observers will watch how Abascal’s plan translates on match day, particularly against teams that emphasize rapid counters and dangerous set plays. The emphasis on organization behind the ball and the ability to transition quickly could decide whether Spartak stabilizes the back line or continues to concede moments of vulnerability that invite scrutiny from supporters and pundits alike. The ongoing evaluation of personnel, the coordination among the back four, and the goalkeeper’s distribution will all contribute to Spartak’s results in the near term, with focused attention on the chemistry between Litvinov, Svinov, Jikia, and the rest of the squad as they adapt to evolving challenges in the Russia-wide competition and in cup ties that test depth and resilience.