“Ianis Hagi had a bad day”

In Istanbul, in a must-win match to stay in the qualification books, the “tricolors” failed to manage a single shot, being defeated by a goal that came after only a few minutes of play in the second half.

What are the impressions left by Ovidiu Ioanițoaia?

Ovidiu Ioanițoaia, after 0-1 in Istanbul: “Turkey was not the scarecrow we were talking about”

“It's definitely a feeling of disappointment, despite the fact that I bought into the idea before the game that Turkey had the first chance. It happened exactly what I feared: another honorable, decent defeat. But I, to be honest, I'm tired of nice defeats.

I would like to see more victories, even if they are ugly. But as we thought the game, let's defend ourselves, we couldn't get more. We don't even have the equipment to change the board.

The feeling of sadness is accentuated by the fact that the Turkish team was not the scarecrow we were talking about. There are 3-4 good players, it's true, but Turkey is not a great team. Yesterday's match was between two modest teams and we found out why neither of them have qualified for the Worlds so far.

It wasn't the bulldozer we expected, with 40,000 spectators to support, with Calhanoglu and a few €75 or €90m stars. No, Turkey, from what I understood, is in the situation of Portugal before Cristiano Ronaldo, when it had players but no team.

If we had a different mindset and value, we should have achieved more against Turkey. Not to say that if the match had been played in Bucharest, the balance of forces would not have been the same as in Istanbul, where the Turks still had 64% possession and, without shining, all in all, they still played slightly better than the Romanians.

The fact that we played this play-off is a privilege, a chance that was given to us after we failed to use the previous chances. But that's the situation. Now we are again in the moment where we are thinking about rebuilding.

We are always rebuilding, but to do that you must first build. Here is the big problem. But I don't want to deal with the Federation again, with the U21 rule that didn't work and so on.

I heard, among others, Dănuț Lupu, who said something that impressed me: “How can we grow, as long as others give money to children to learn football, and we ask them for money to teach them?”, said the experienced journalist in his intervention on the GSP Live show.

“It's like we're scared of bombs”

“As long as Man and Mihăilă, three quarters of the match, were defenders rather than attacking midfielders, then don't expect more. I'm starting to think that that's how our teams are designed, including the national team: to defend.

We enter the field with the idea that the opponents are stronger, let's try to block them, defend ourselves, go out on the counterattack a few times, score a goal and then stay on the defensive, let's take advantage of this advantage.

It's true, the team performed relatively decently, but they didn't cause much trouble either. He had Stanciu's bar; if he had scored there it would have been somewhat against the flow of the game. We have to change our attitude in general, our mentality, our approach.

I look at the Kosovars, who won in Bratislava, and the Bosniaks. They have guts, they come on your turf and attack you, they don't have any kind of complex. We enter as if scared of bombs and stay like that until the end”, added the director of Gazeta.

Ioanițoaia took the players in turn: “Ianis Hagi had a bad day”

Who did Ioanițoaia notice, or who did he think was below par?

“There are a few who performed below their level, led by Ianis Hagiwho had a bad day. I would have expected, to be fair, that Lucescu would change him a little earlier.

Razvan Marin he was also on a less successful day, I expected much more from Ratiuwhich struck me as sloppy and is undoubtedly to blame for the goal conceded. He was supposed to close the area, collect, but Rațiu seems more of an attacking player than a defensive one. He pretty much does what he wants.

Surprisingly, and deservedly so, Bancu was the best of the tricolors yesterday. Ionuț Radu did his duty as much as he could, and Man and Mihăilă were better in defense than in attack. But even so, I think Lucescu could have changed faster.

You introduce Baiaram and Miculescu in the 87th minute. What to do? In overtime, when to win your match? Please, it's always like this: the best team is the one that doesn't play, and after the war, many heroes show themselves”, declared Ioanițoaia.

Ovidiu Ioanițoaia, about Mircea Lucescu: “He is no longer the same one who became the third most decorated coach in history”

You realize what is in Mircea Lucescu's soul. I don't use big words, but he really sacrificed himself. He is not only an 80-year-old man, but one who has problems. He admitted that it was not in his waters, but it was used by the Federation, it was the best umbrella. The federation said: “Well, if we brought you Mircea Lucescu, what else do you have to reproach us with?”

But one, he didn't have enough raw material, and two, wear and tear, age… Lucescu is no longer the one who became the third most decorated coach in history, and it's a shame that he leaves football in such a situation. No doubt it was worth much more than that.

What does Ioanițoaia think would change with Gică Hagi the selector?

These are the players, others have nowhere to appear at least in the immediate future. The U21 rule, which was supposed to produce great talent, did not produce much. The reluctance of some towards it is justified. Yesterday's game was a nation's game and it was lost, but this nation has lost more important games than last night.

I don't want to be pessimistic, but Romanian football is what it is. I find it hard to believe that as long as football management is the same there will be a change for the better.