UPDATE. Here is an alternative proof, due to Maxim Didin, of the more general fact:
Theorem 1. Let $(G,+)$ be a finite abelian group, and $f$, $g$ be two colorings (maps) from $G$ to a color set $C$ such that for every $k\in G$, $f(x)\not\equiv g(x+k)$ (in other words, $f$ is not a shifted $g$). Then there exists a coloring $h\colon G\to C$ such that $f(x)\ne h(x)$ for all $x\in G$, but for every $k$ there exists $x\in G$ such that $h(x)=g(x+k)$.
Denote $n=|G|$. For $k\in G$, denote by $g_k(x):=g(x+k)$ a shift of $g$ by $k$. Some shifts may coincide. Denote by $\Phi$ the set of all distinct shifts of $g$. The following strengthens Theorem 1.
Theorem 2. In above notations and under assumptions of Theorem 1, there exists an injection $\eta:\Phi\to G$ such that for all $\varphi\in \Phi$ we have $f(\eta(\varphi))\ne \varphi(\eta(\varphi))$.
(To deduce Theorem 1 from Theorem 2, define $h(\eta(\varphi)):=\varphi(\eta(\varphi))$ for $\varphi\in \Phi$, that is possible by injectivity of $\eta$; also define $h(x)=g(x)$ for $x\notin \eta(\Phi)$.)
To prove Theorem 2, we say that a shift $\varphi\in \Phi$ likes an element $x\in G$ if $f(x)\ne \varphi(x)$. Then by Hall marriage condition, to check the conclusion of Theorem 2 it is sufficient (and necessary) to prove that any set $M\subset \Phi$ of shifts of $g$ like in total at least $|M|$ elements $x\in G$. If $|M|=1$, this is true by our assumption. For $|M|>1$ this follows from the following
Proposition. For any set $M\subset \Phi$, $|M|>1$, there exist at least $|M|$ elements $x\in G$ such that $|\{\varphi(x)|\varphi\in M\}|\geqslant 2$.
(Obviously any such element $x$ is liked by some shift from $M$ that yields Hall's condition.) Proposition in turn follows from the key
Lemma. Let $A\subsetneq G$ be an arbitrary subset of $G$ which is not equal to $G$. Call a shift $g_k\in \Phi$ of the coloring $g$ $A$-appropriate if $g_k(x)=g(x)$ for all $x\in A$. Then there exist at most $n-|A|$ distinct $A$-appropriate shifts.
Proof of Lemma. If the only $A$-appropriate shift is $g_0(x)=g(x)$, we are done as $1\leqslant n-|A|$. So, assume that $g_k$ is $A$-appropriate but $g_k\not\equiv g$. For every $x\notin A$ define $P(x)$ as the maximal set of the form $\{x,x-k,x-2k,\ldots\}$ for which $x-k,x-2k,\ldots$ all belong to $A$ (it may happen that $P(x)=\{x\}$). Since $g_k$ is $k$-appropriate, the coloring $g$ is constant on each set $P(x)$. The whole $G$ is partitioned onto $n-|A|$ sets $P(x)$ and several orbits $\{a,a+k,a+2k,\ldots\}$ which are contained in $A$. Since $g_k\not\equiv g$, there exists an element $\alpha\in G$ such that $g(\alpha)\ne g(\alpha-k)$. Assume that $g_c\in \Phi$ is $A$-appropriate, that is, $g(x)=g(x+c)$ for all $x\in A$. If both $\alpha-c$, $\alpha-c-k$ belong to $A$, then $g(\alpha)=g(\alpha-c)=g(\alpha-c-k)=g(\alpha-k)$, a contradiction. Thus $\alpha-c$ must belong to some set $P(x)=\{x,x-k,x-2k,\ldots, x-(d-1)k\}$ for $x\notin A$. Also, either $\alpha-c=x$ or $\alpha-c=x-(d-1)k$. Let us show that for fixed $x$, at most one element of $P(x)$ may appear as $\alpha-c$ (when $c$ vary). Assume the contrary, then in particular $d>1$. If $\alpha-c=x$, we have $\alpha-c-k=x-k\in A$, thus $g(\alpha-k)=g(\alpha-c-k)=g(x)$. If $\alpha-c=\alpha-(d-1)k\in A$, then $g(\alpha)=g(\alpha-c)=g(x)$. Since both equations $g(\alpha-k)=g(x)$, $g(\alpha)=g(x)$ can not hold simultaneously, we see that at most one element of $P(x)$ may be equal to $\alpha-c$. Thus there exists at most $n-|A|$ possible $c$ for which $g_c$ is $A$-appropriate.
It remains to deduce Proposition from Lemma that is rather tautological.
Proof of Proposition. Without loss of generality $g_0=g\in M$. If the claim does not hold, there exist $n-k+1$ elements $x$ for which $|\{\varphi(x)|\varphi\in M\}|=1$, i.e., $\varphi(x)=g(x)$ for all $\varphi\in M$. But then by Lemma $|M|\leqslant k-1$, a contradiction.