In an interview with LiveSport.ru correspondent Mikhail Pukshansky, Stanislav Cherchesov shared his thoughts on the FIFA Club World Cup final.
— Ahead of the final against Chelsea (0:3), PSG were seen as much stronger favorites than they had been before the semifinal against Real Madrid. Did you feel the same way?
— I’m not one to comment on bookmakers’ odds — I look at things from a coach’s perspective. Chelsea transformed over the course of the season — they became younger, bolder, quicker. For them, the Club World Cup became the peak of that evolution. When you analyze Real Madrid, with all their ups and downs, a new manager, and ongoing changes — had they reached the final, it would have felt somewhat surprising. That’s why, from the start, I did not see the final — between two fast, technically gifted teams — as something that would be easy for the French side.
— The English side made it clear from the start they weren’t going to sit back and play second fiddle. Were they banking on an early goal?
— I watched the match with my son. I immediately said, “This won’t be an easy one today”. Still, they were not so audacious as to seriously set out to score quickly against PSG. The idea was to press high — not to let the opponent open up their build-up and get the ball forward quickly to Dembele and Doue. And the most important thing Chelsea did, in my view, was tear the heart out of PSG in the shape of Vitinha, Ruiz, and Neves. Those three were never allowed to play their natural game.
— Still, at 0–0 there was a moment that could have sent the match in a different direction. How do you explain that Desire Doue, who always goes for goal, chose to pass from a prime scoring position?
— Hard to say what he was thinking. Maybe he judged the angle too tight, or didn’t see that Cucurella had already closed off the passing lane to Khvicha. He probably figured he would just roll it across and his teammate would tap into an empty net — happens with them often enough. But Kvaratskhelia, it seems, was not expecting the pass; he held a line with the defender, ready to pounce on a rebound if anything spilled. If Kvara had held his run for a split second, if Doue had taken that tiny pause, it might all have turned out differently. But football, as we know, doesn’t recognise the subjunctive.
— Could PSG have been overconfident after their emphatic wins and dominant performances against four English clubs in the Champions League?
— They should not have been. After all, they were facing a completely different opponent. And how can you be certain of anything when your rival also earned their place in the final? They clearly did their homework. That said, it is almost impossible to cruise through an entire tournament — whether at club or international level — without hitting a bump. The only exception I can think of is Spain at the last European Championship.
At major tournaments, every team has at least one match where they do not quite look like themselves. For Chelsea, that dip came in the group stage against Flamengo (1:3). For PSG, it happened in the final. Even a loss has to come at the right time. That defeat did not leave a lasting mark on the English side. But the French team had steamrolled everyone up to that point — and when the final came, they had nothing left in the tank.
— Why didn’t we see PSG’s usual expansive, free-flowing style of play?
— Because they were not out there alone. The opposition had pace, quality, and their own weapons. As Nikolai Petrovich Starostin used to say, speed is hard to stop. That is why you sometimes get matches like the Champions League final, where PSG’s players were simply quicker than Inter’s.
But in this game, Chelsea matched them not just in terms of football IQ but in raw pace across the pitch. They were well-prepared, and PSG did not present any surprises — the French side plays the same brand of football with virtually no variation in the lineup.
And from PSG’s side, I’ll say it again — it was not so much physical fatigue as the emotional and psychological dip that every team experiences in tournaments like this. You feel like you are still yourself, but something’s missing. That spark fades. We saw signs of it even against Bayern — PSG did not look like dominant favorites. Yes, the 2–0 scoreline was solid, but the game itself was anything but straightforward.
— It is not the first time we’ve seen a team with one of the best defences completely unravel in a single match — or even just one half. Is there a rational explanation for that?
— It is a bit like a boxer taking a heavy blow and staying dazed until the bell. And we are talking about players who have already won everything. But at the end of the day, they are still human — and psychology plays a crucial role. Even if a coach sees the problem, and I say this from experience, it’s incredibly difficult to get through to the players mid-game and prompt them to make adjustments on the fly.
Imagine you have spent three days preparing for one or two specific situations, and suddenly you are not even dealing with Plan C — you are at Plan D. In that kind of chaos, it is hard for players to react and reorganize in the moment. What you really need is a break — a pause to let them catch their breath, for you to shuffle a few pieces, give clear instructions, and calmly explain what needs to change.
— What do you say in the dressing room if you are Luis Enrique, a coach who may not have faced this kind of scenario in a while?
— That’s a great question. It’s a tough spot. When you and your players are used to winning and suddenly find yourselves 0–3 down, shouting and yelling won’t solve anything. This is exactly when you need to find the right words. Judging by how the second half played out — they did not concede six more — it seems something was said at halftime. The team looked different after the break.
— But can any words really change a result like that?
— We all know PSG have the ability to turn games around. But from the very first minutes, it was clear something was missing. So, for me, the outcome was already quite apparent.
— What happened to Nuno Mendes in this match, given the brilliant season he has had?
— He is only 23 — he is not a machine that can perform flawlessly every time. None of us watched every single PSG match this season, and I am sure at some point in Lille or Lens he made a similar mistake. The difference is, those teams might not have had the quality to capitalize on it. Or maybe they did, but it was 5–1 at the time and no one remembers. This time, the whole world was watching — but let’s not blow it out of proportion. The first goal started with a sharp, unexpected pass from the goalkeeper (presumably part of Sanchez’s instructions), and it caught Mendes off balance. His head was spinning for a moment. At this level, opponents force you into mistakes — that’s just how it is. Let the lad get some rest, clear his mind. Then he can go over what happened. He’s obviously a smart player — he’ll figure out what he could have done differently.
— Would you agree that the game completely passed Khvicha by?
— There’s no point denying it — that’s exactly what happened. Kvaratskhelia had a brilliant season. I was at the Champions League final and saw him in full flow — working hard both in attack and defence. Let’s be honest, in that team and in that match, it wasn’t easy to stand out — yet he managed to do just that. He scored, and showed his class in many other moments. But this time… football is a team game. It’s like the hospital ward effect — when you visit a friend with the flu and there are eight others coughing nearby, chances are you’ll catch it too. Khvicha is not playing in a vacuum. When the whole team is out of sync, he feels it too. They eat together, attend tactical sessions together, train side by side — they share the same rhythm. Something was missing across the board, and Khvicha was affected like the rest.
— Enzo Maresca used 27 players throughout the season. Was that squad depth what made the difference in the end?
— Sometimes circumstances force you to rotate that much. But first of all, you need the quality in depth — otherwise, things quickly fall apart. And second, when new players are brought in, they have to be tested properly to see how they perform in different roles. You have to find the right balance. Maresca built the squad to avoid those structural gaps that top clubs simply can’t afford. And clearly, it paid off. That’s why when fresh players were needed, they were able to slot in without disrupting the system.
— Is Cole Palmer’s impact purely down to individual brilliance, or is it more about the team context?
— Just look at the Conference League final against Betis. For some reason, Palmer was barely noticeable in the first half. But in the second, he switched on, raised the tempo — and suddenly it was a completely different Chelsea. The team transformed, and instead of trailing 0–1, they ran out 4–1 winners.
He is the kind of player who elevates the overall quality of the team, affects the performance, and, as a result, the outcome. If he is in form and ready to play, that alone gives you a huge advantage. Every team relies on players like him. It was the same in every team I’ve coached, and really, it has always been that way in football. That is why we hear terms like “Palmer-dependence” now. Just like we’ve had “Dzyuba-dependence,” “Yamal-dependence,” and so on. Every team needs someone who can shoulder that kind of responsibility.
— A couple of goalkeeping questions: were Palmer’s two goals simply unstoppable — even for someone like Gianluigi Donnarumma?
— Again, it comes down to that spark — that instinctive read of the game. Sometimes everything aligns and you anticipate what’s coming before it happens — that is often the only way to stop shots like those. It is like penalties: you do not react, you pick a side early and commit. If Donnarumma had sensed, even on an intuitive level, that the ball was going there and focused his attention in that direction from the start, maybe he could’ve saved it. And he has made saves like that before.
— Do you really think Robert Sánchez pulled off something miraculous with that early save from Doué?
— You commentators do have a flair for the dramatic — as the saying goes, fear makes the wolf look bigger. That said, it was not the easiest shot to deal with. But I would not call it anything extraordinary. Sánchez put himself in trouble by initially moving the wrong way, which made the save more difficult. But credit to him — he didn’t give up and stayed with the play. He caused the problem, but he solved it too.
— Slightly off-topic: was there really no chance for Matvei Safonov to get some game time in this tournament?
— That is hard for me to say. Sure, it is the World Cup, but in many ways it is also a showcase tournament. There were matches where the score was 4–0 or 3–0 by halftime — moments that might have allowed for a change. But at the same time, this is not hockey or handball, where you can change goalkeepers ten times a game. It seems the decision from the start was that Donnarumma would play every match. Only Matvei himself can say whether he had that conversation with the coach. We’ll have to wait and see — maybe more will come out. Personally, I was really curious to see how he’d perform at this level.
— What do you think sparked the scuffle after the match? Was it triggered by something that happened during the game?
— The PSG players were clearly in shock at the scoreline. One thing builds on another — drop by drop until the glass overflows. I don’t want to speculate too much, and honestly, it’s not that crucial. But from the perspective of the billions watching, it didn’t look great — especially with both head coaches getting involved. Still, we are all human. Sometimes emotions get the better of us. I am not here to judge anyone — to be honest, I might have behaved even worse in that situation.
