Luciano Spalletti: “The result was fair in terms of play”

Zenit`s head coach answered questions after the match with Dynamo, which ended with Zenit letting victory slip away in the last seconds, about time, the double result of the match, and transfer rules.

— The result was fair. Both teams played open football. We made mistakes at some times, while in others our opponent made mistakes. We didn`t take advantage of a lot of our chances, so the result, again, was fair. That`s as far as the way the teams played on the field. But the match wasn`t fair as concerns the referee`s work. Because Dynamo scored its goal when the match had already ended.

— You made a lot of gestures during the match, and showed the players that you were upset. With what, exactly?
— The only time I got up was when Meira came on as a substitute. I wanted to change his position in the wall. After that I asked two of our players to come back more in defense. Dynamo started playing more to Kuranyi towards the end, and he plays very well with his head, so we had to stop Dynamo from making long passes to him.

— What did you try to explain to Igor Egorov after the match, and in what language? It seems that he doesn`t understand Italian very well.
— He understands perfectly well, because he knows what he did. When the assistant shows the board, and it says 4 minutes, that means that 4 minutes are added. When there`s one substitution, that means we add another 30 seconds. So 4.30, not 4.50. Ya, he showed the wall where to stand for a long time, but time isn`t added for that. If we take the rules by the letter, then there should have been another 30 seconds added, because the Dynamo players celebrated a long after having scored their goal. Right? The match wasn`t going on at this time. The players were off the field. If we play the way referee wants to, ok, but if we play by the rules, then we play by the rules. What are the rules? One substitution — 30 seconds, and the match would have ended thirty seconds before the goal was scored. Like I said before the match, Egorov doesn`t like me very much.

— As far as the second go, don`t you think time could have been added for Fayzulin`s red card for, and the long time it took for the free kick?
— You like it better that way? If we start interpreting how it could have been, then the time will never end. Where does it say that another 30 seconds are added for a yellow card? It says in the rules that 30 seconds are added for a substitution. If you like, you can give that explanation, but the watch speaks for itself.

— Zenit took Danny from Dynamo in the summer of 2008, and a year later — Bystrov from Spartak. Last year Zenit took Bukharov and Semak from Rubin. Will Zenit continue to weaken its main rivals?
— Didn`t Dynamo buy Kuranyi? Voronin? What do you mean, main rivals? We take players who suit our team. If I need a center forward, then I take one depending on what the situation is. So we took Lazović, and Luković. Is there some kind of new rule? We`re going to continue taking players that we need. And don`t forget that we`re the only team that didn`t buy any new players this winter. Maybe we`ll buy somebody from Dynamo. Samedov is a good player.

— I have a question about Danny. You didn`t take him to this match because he was late coming back from national team duty. Is that a good enough reason for him not to play?
— We have other players in the team, so we`re going to talk about those who were here, who played a good match, because they could have won against a very strong Dynamo team.

— Your disappointment is understandable. Are you happy that the same referee didn`t call the clear penalty in Zenit`s penalty box for taking down Samedov?
— No, I`m not happy. There was no penalty there. Our defender played the ball. Understand me, we`re talking about different things. You can give a penalty or not. That`s a question of interpretation. I can also ask you to take a look at the episode with Huszti being taken down in the Dynamo box in the last minutes, but that`s not a question of breaking the rules, that`s a question of interpretation.