Isabelle Haak played another great match, leading Conegliano to a second consecutive Champions League title after scoring 21 points in the final against Scandicci. The Swedish opposite solidified her star status, adding a third Champions League trophy to her collection, and was logically the favorite for the MVP of the Final Four in Istanbul.
But… CEV's logic stops here.
The selection of the ideal team and best coach caused a storm of reactions in the hall and on social media.
🏐 Isabelle Haak was MVP of the Final Four, but despite this – she was not included in the ideal team of the tournament in her position – opposite! 🤯
Instead of recognition for the heroine of the final, the award went to... Paola Egonu. Not a word about Ekaterina Andropova (20 y.o.), who showed composure, class, and future in this position.
But that's not all.
Best setter: Alessia Orro (Milano) was preferred over 41-year-old Maja Ognjenović from Scandicci, who demonstrated maturity, vision, and leadership, leading her team to the final and silver.
Middle blockers: Hena Kurtagić (Milano) with 0 out of 8 in attack in the small final and only 3 points?! Lubian (Conegliano) also without a significant impact! 🤨
Scandicci – the finalist, who remained without a single player in the ideal team…
🏆 Best coach – Vakifbank?!
The culmination of bewilderment came with the selection of Giovanni Guidetti (Vakifbank) as best coach. Yes, that's right – for a team that didn't reach the final and remained without a medal. Why? How? No one explained. 🤯
📌 CEV: "We consider the entire tournament, not just the Final Four"
In an attempt to explain, CEV stated that the selection is not based only on the final two matches, but on the entire performance in the tournament. If this is the case, where is Scandicci in the whole scheme, given that Marco Gaspari's players arethe only team without a lost setuntil the Final Four – eight wins from eight matches. The problem? No one was informed about these "criteria," neither before nor during the finals. There is no clarity, no transparency, only confusions, which raises doubts about the objectivity of the awards.
photos: Nikolay Varadinov
