Small introduction. The thing that is most annoying, after Genoa’s match at San Siro, which was very generous and ended with an excellent draw, is that many are nitpicking, criticizing small discrepancies in the match played by the rossoblù. And even more annoying are certain reports that discuss at length more about the demerits of Milan than the (considerable) merits of the rossoblù.
As if they had played a match with a positive performance and result only because the opponents were poor. Instead, the opposite happened: the Rossoneri with the luxury names, whose managers had spent 12 million in the winter transfer window alone, finished the match badly, conceding three goals and perhaps they also deserved the fourth.
After this match (let’s remember, the Grifone was missing five important names: Gudmundsson, Vitinha, Messias, Malinovskyi and Bani) once again one wonders how it was possible to let so much time pass before reconfirming Gilardino. Was it not immediately clear how important this coach is for Genoa, beyond his growth, for what he managed to create, to motivate, to understand football like few others?
Milan were faced with the usual maximum attention, after a few minutes from the start the rossoblù were already 1-0 (goal from a penalty by Retegui), they came close to scoring the second goal, they didn’t take advantage of other opportunities, then certainly some glitches occurred , some errors on dead balls, but overall the performance was of a good standard.
Would you have said that there was a 28 point difference between second-placed Milan and Genoa? So why did those “upturned noses” express perplexity in front of the 43 points splendidly achieved by the Grifone?
The match could also have seen the rossoblù as winners, even if in the end the result was right and the Griffins have, in a certain sense, redeemed that shocking goal with which Milan won in the first leg, with the unforgettable Pulisic .
And once again Vogliacco came to the fore, certainly among the best on the pitch, being considered so far with some limitations compared to his teammates, and Thorsby once again the protagonist (this time not on high balls) with his traditional “wickedness”. And again the “old” Badelj: woe if he isn’t confirmed.
According to the critics, it was also a Genoa with some flaws, but we had never seen a team on an opposing pitch that, a few minutes from the end, recovered the deficit and with stubbornness with the desire to look for the fourth goal.
It has now been understood that this structure created by Gilardino now has its own consistency and, looking ahead, we can only continue to build it, brick by brick, floor after floor up to the roof which, according to forecasts, should be reached in three years.
The feeling is that this team already has its own precise physiognomy, on which we will simply give it even greater intensity, so as to create an image that is as suitable as possible for the next championship.
One final consideration: think if Gudmundsson and Messias had come down to the Meazza and what they could have done in front of those enormous spaces offered by the dazed AC Milan fans…
Vittorio Sirianni
