history of kyiv dynamo, because we see that now it is only a regression, well, look, we know that igor surkis always likes to sign someone with the coach. why is he not doing anything this time, it does not strengthen the position of the forward, where there is only one duo the position of the central the defender, where we see how don't tesui, it's simple well, at any moment someone will bring either an orphan or popov or a white-haired dyachuk, but this is not clear to me well, first of all , it is possible that i have a financial component. well, we cannot rule it out because we we do not know the financial component of the kyiv club itself, although we understand that in the light of what is happening, more precisely, at the moment , the transfers that we are used to before the season are not taking place, because we understood that dynamo kyiv needs reinforcements. well, we also we understand again that here he would definitely be suitable for dynamo kyiv, we understand that his movement would definitely be given even there well, i don't know there for conditional compensation maybe even

respect to him well , if he were conventionally speaking to the consultants , for example, the same igor surkisrkis, then one thing a-a we saw even that without at the end of the season of oleksandr shovkovsky's podgorod, the team looked so much easier, more sociable , we saw that it was more capable of achieving results and winning with a large enough score, those matches against outsiders that were given to kyiv dynamo well, simply it's very easy, so again, we're talking about this lucescu factor, but he's mostly now, on the contrary, kyiv dynamo lacks him, that's all he had before that he gave and now everything extra has gone in the other direction that's why we need these now. i think that we should round off the measurements or put a full stop and continue to write a new history of kyiv dynamo, because we see that now it is only a regression, well, look, we know that ihor surkis always likes to sign something with the coach. why does he do this? he never does anything, he does not strengthen the position of the forward, where there is only one duo , he does not strengthen the position of

well, if he were conventionally speaking to the consultants, for example, the same igor surkis or grigory surkis, then one thing a-a we even saw that without him the endings during the season of podgorod oleksandr shovkovskyi, the team looked so much easier, more sociable, we saw that it was more capable of achieving a result and with a sufficiently large score to win those matches against outsiders who were given to kyiv dynamo well, it's just very easy, that's why, well, again, we're talking about this lucescu factor, but he's mostly now, on the contrary , kyiv dynamo lacks him, that's all he had before that he gave and now everything extra is gone in the other direction that's why we need these now. i think that we should round off the measures or put a full stop and continue to write a new history of kyiv dynamo, because we see that now it's only a regression , well, look, we know that ihor surkis always loves uh, there's nothing wrong with the coach sign someone why is he not doing anything from this time on, he does not strengthen the position of the forward, where there is only one