Žilina's Tactical Shift in Comeback Win Over Hajduk Split
Žilina’s 2-1 comeback over HNK Hajduk Split at Štadión pod Dubňom in the UEFA Europa League 1st Qualifying Round was built on clear structural contrasts: a flexible 3-4-3 gradually imposing itself over an initially well-drilled 4-2-3-1. With almost all quantitative metrics missing, the tactical story is carried by shape, substitutions, and the sequence of key events rather than raw numbers.
First Half
Hajduk’s 4-2-3-1 under Gonzalo Garcia was conservative without the ball and highly targeted in possession. The double pivot of Roko Pukstas and Ardit Pajaziti sat close to the back four, ensuring rest defence against Žilina’s front three. Early on, this gave the Croatian side good control of central zones: the full-backs Šimun Hrgović and Dario Melnjak could step out to engage wing-backs and wide forwards knowing they had cover inside. The decisive first-half moment reflected that structure: at 45', a set-piece or wide-phase delivery found Alec Van Hoorenbeeck, assisted by Hrgović, attacking the space Žilina left between centre-back and wing-back. The goal, later confirmed by VAR at 45+3', underlined Hajduk’s emphasis on exploiting wide-to-central channels with their defenders aggressively attacking the box.
Žilina, set up by Pavol Stano in a listed 3-4-3, initially struggled to turn possession into penetration. The back three of J. Minarik, A. Narimanidze and T. Paliscak had to cope with Marko Sego’s lone-forward movements plus the late arrivals from Nikola Skoko and Roko Brajkovic. The wing-backs T. Hranica and K. Bari were pinned deep for long stretches in the first half, leaving M. Roginic and P. Ilko relatively isolated. That isolation explains why Žilina rarely threatened before the interval despite the three-forward structure.
Second Half
The game’s tactical hinge came immediately after half-time. At 46', Stano replaced T. Paliscak with M. Okal, a like-for-like defensive change on paper but one that subtly rebalanced the back line. Žilina began to defend higher and compress play, with Okal more proactive in stepping into midfield lines. This allowed central midfielders Xavier Adang and M. Kacer to push five to ten metres further forward, turning the 3-4-3 into more of a 3-2-5 in possession.
The equaliser at 52' captured that shift. M. Roginic scored for Žilina, assisted by F. Kosa, after the hosts finally managed to connect their wide and central lanes. Kosa’s involvement from the right side of the attacking line suggested Žilina were now finding overloads against Hajduk’s full-backs, dragging the double pivot out and opening pockets between the lines. VAR confirmed Roginic’s goal at 54', but the more important confirmation was tactical: Žilina had found a repeatable route into the final third.
From there, the match became a battle of bench management. Garcia’s first response came at 64', with D. de Almeida (IN) coming on for N. Skoko (OUT). That swap nudged Hajduk’s attacking midfield band towards a more physically robust, perhaps more transitional profile, trying to regain control of central duels. Stano answered at 66' with a double move: F. Bzdyl (IN) for M. Kacer (OUT) in midfield, and M. Fasko (IN) for F. Kosa (OUT) in attack. Removing Kosa, who had just provided the assist, was notable: it hinted at a desire for more direct running in behind from Fasko rather than the combination play Kosa had offered.
Žilina’s growing territorial dominance was visible in the disciplinary pattern. After Hajduk’s early yellows — Šimun Hrgović at 21' and Alec Van Hoorenbeeck at 30', both for “Foul” — the second half saw Žilina’s midfielders increasingly involved in disruptive work. At 67', Xavier Adang was booked for “Persistent fouling”, a clear sign he had been repeatedly stepping out to break Hajduk’s counters as Žilina committed more bodies forward. Later, at 90+2', Andrei Florea received a yellow card for “Foul”, again reflecting Žilina’s willingness to take tactical infringements to protect their late lead.
Stano continued to reshape his front unit. At 72', S. Datko (IN) replaced P. Ilko (OUT), adding fresh legs and potentially more defensive work from the front. At 82', the coach made his most telling tweak: A. Florea (IN) came on for X. Adang (OUT). This change traded a ball-winning pivot for a more progressive profile, indicating that Žilina were not content with a draw and were prepared to keep attacking in the final minutes rather than simply hold parity.
Garcia, by contrast, leaned towards preserving structure. At 75', he made a double substitution: A. Sanyang (IN) for S. Hrgovic (OUT) and A. Guram (IN) for R. Brajkovic (OUT). Removing Hrgovic, who had earlier assisted the opening goal, reduced some of Hajduk’s thrust from deep, suggesting a tilt towards control and protection of the 1-1 rather than chasing a second away goal. At 84', M. Livaja (IN) replaced M. Sego (OUT), a move that, in theory, should have added creativity and hold-up play up front. But by then, Žilina’s back three and double pivot were set higher and more compact, making it difficult for Livaja to receive between the lines.
The decisive moment at 90' — Dario Melnjak’s own goal, credited to Žilina — was consistent with the territorial trend of the second half. Hajduk’s left-back, under pressure in his own box, turned the ball into his own net, sealing a 2-1 turnaround for the hosts. That error was less an isolated lapse and more the culmination of sustained pressure from a side that had gradually pushed its wing-backs and forwards into more aggressive positions.
Defensively, both teams showed discipline in terms of numbers: two yellow cards each, no reds. But the timing and reasons matter. Hajduk’s early bookings came from trying to stem Žilina’s attempts to transition quickly when they did win the ball, while Žilina’s later yellows reflected a side defending higher and more aggressively once they had seized the initiative.
Without concrete possession or shot data, the tactical verdict rests on structure, changes, and momentum. Hajduk’s 4-2-3-1 gave them early control and a deserved 1-0 half-time lead, built on compactness and set-piece or wide-phase efficiency. Žilina’s 3-4-3, however, evolved intelligently after the break: the introduction of Okal, then Fasko, Datko and finally Florea shifted the match towards a more assertive, multi-lane attack that eventually forced the decisive own goal. In a two-legged European context, the 2-1 home win is not only a psychological boost but also a validation of Stano’s in-game adaptability against a structurally solid Hajduk side.
