USSR the Cup

When it comes to looking for general tendencies, Soviet Cup is particularly difficult and slippery subject. It had frequently changed formats and time tables, including the finals. The peculiar Northern climate clashing with international football pretty much made for tow separate seasons: often the Cup was played in the familiar European fall-spring schedule, but the championship was spring-fall, with most games played in the summer. In contrast, the Cup was largely squeezed in the winter and early spring. Final were played in all kind of season, in different months, but international games made finals in the fall problematic – the winner was unable to join the current Cup Winners Cup, but the next year’s and who knows in what shape the Soviet represent will be by then. It was safe bet to expect Dinamo (Kiev) and Spartak (Moscow) to be competitive a year later, but for smaller clubs it was not likely: SKA (Rostov) won the Cup in 1981, but by the time they joined the Cup Winners Cup it was not just 1982, but the winners were relegated and struggling in second division. Not the same team at all. Finding the right time for the Cup became big challenge – on one hand, winter games meant that many teams, even traditionally strong ones, were out of shape, for the season was officially over and their players were taking a break. Going back to parallel the regular season meant too many games and no enough time for all of them. So, the Cup meandered from one form to another, changing almost every year. This year the final was in May – a time, when many teams were not yet in their best form, for it was still early stage of the championship. Which ended in November – to combine a spring winner with late fall one is hardly convincing argument when trying to see tendencies, but still two things could be safely claimed: Ukrainian clubs lead Soviet football and smaller clubs were succesfully rubbing shoulders with traditional powerhouses, even pushing them back. The final opposed Metalist (Kharkov) to Shakhter (Donetzk). Neither team was particularly exciting at the moment, yet, they reached the final . The finalists lacked famous players, but ambition compensated for that – the final was hardly memorable game, but it was fairly equal and difficult to win. And that is all that matters for a final.

The Metalist goalkeeper Yu. Sivukha was unable to prevent V. Grachev (Shakhter) from scoring. Two players, who were becoming familiar names around USSR. Sivukha appears awkwardly positioned here, which may be a good illustration of what happened – more experienced Shakther won 2-1. Tiny mistakes made the difference and Metalist, one of the emerging teams at the time, was unable to win first trophy.

After the fact, it is easy to say Metalist lost for lack of experience. They came back to first division only recently after spending many dark years not just in second division, but in the third. As one of already many Ukrainian clubs in the top league, they had little chance for recruiting top talent – they ranked quite low in the Ukrainian pyramid – not only behind Dinamo (Kiev), but behind Shakhter, Chernomoretz, Dnepr. Even second division clubs like Zarya and Karpaty were not ready suppliers – Metalist had to depend on home-grown talent and whatever other clubs discarded. No wonder their best known players were those who played for other clubs before – Potochnyak, Boyko, Kramarenko. Getting old second-raters… so, Metalist employed pretty much the same approach as Dnepr: collective physical and often rough play. It worked, but not at the final against seasoned and well versed in typical Ukrainian tactics Shakhter. But it was good experience for Metalist, boosting their moral and ambitions. Just it was not their prime time yet.

Shakhter won its 4th Cup. Crouching from left: Sopko, Elinskas, Yashtenko, Pokidin, Akimenko, Pyanykh, Sokolovsky, Shturlak, Parhomenko.

Standing: Nossov – coach, Kalinin – team chief, Grachev, Yurchenko, Popovich, Morozov, Simonov, Rudakov, Varnavsky, Ovchinnikov, Radenko, Kutzev, Glubokov – docter, Tkachenko – masseur, Drozdenko – assistant coach.

Shakhter almost specialized in playing for the Cup – they kind of lost their leading position, achieved in the second half of the 1970s, but still remained the second best Ukrainian club. The formula was their own – usually, they had 2-3 leading veterans in great form, a group of 3-4 mid-aged strong players and few promising youngsters. As years went, the veterans stepped down, replaced by the former mid-agers and young talent transformed into solid and dependable players at their prime. Hardly ever they had particularly outstanding players attracting preying ayes – rather, their top players were a bit unusual – recognized as wonderful, but not fitting into other schemes for one or another reason and Shakhter was able to keep them. Of course, they were losing players too – goalkeepers brothers Chanov, Reznik, who went to Spartak (Moscow), but the club was able to replace quickly the losses with similarly good players. So, this vintage was lead by veterans Sokolovksy and Simonov, with solid and experienced group behind them – Rudakov, Varnavsky, Elinskas, Puanykh, and talented yougsters pushing up – Grachev, Yurchenko, Radenko, Popovich. Not a squad strong enough to win the the title, but able to get the Cup – with the result that Shakhter became the most successful club not based in the capital cities of Moscow, Kiev, and Tbilisi.

And at the end of the season, it was complete dominance of Ukrainian and second-rate clubs – Dnepr and Shakhter. Perhaps 1982 was the year the ‘provincials’ really reached the top of the Soviet football pyramid and stayed there, holding their ground against big capital-city clubs. The 1980s reached a parity, if not actual dominance of the smaller clubs. For the first time Soviet football was lead by secondary provincial clubs – and it was not just one-time wonder, it became the trademark of the decade.