Takianos: “We dominated in the first half, but we were insufficient in the second half”

Fotis Takianos emphasized that the difficulties of the game against AEK were more visible in PAOK due to the absences of Gilmore and Beliauskas, he believes that there was not the necessary concentration in the 40′ and they lacked energy in the second half, he asked them to keep the image of the first half-time in the future and justified the image of the third quarter in the energy of AEK in defense.

Analytically: “It was a game that, from the outset, had its own difficulties and peculiarities. Difficulties arising from AEK’s experience and quality in an away game. We knew it would be a very difficult game and the level of difficulty was raised because of the problems with Gilmore and Beliauskas not playing.

In this process, we set ourselves the goal of staying focused for 40′ and making up for the absences in both our game plan and timings, but from the development of the game it is clear that we did not succeed, although the players tried their best.

The game has two images. In the first half, where we have strengths, we dominate, we set the terms of the game and our defensive tactics pay off. In the second half, we showed ourselves to be insufficient in terms of competition, but mainly in terms of energy and concentration. As time went on, this worked against us.

We want to keep the way we worked in the first half, integrate the missing players and increase the time we play well in performance and concentration.”

Regarding the presence of PAOK in the third quarter, he emphasized: “AEK entered the defense with great energy. We only scored 8 points, not moving the ball like we did in the first half, but also how aggressive AEK was in their defense. We expected it, but we didn’t react properly. AEK’s effectiveness in attack was mainly the result of the quality and experience of the players, and that’s where the personality and quality of its players came out.”