A look at the managerial merry-go-round at Stamford Bridge and Roman Abramovich's fascination to pull the trigger. Before I present the analysis of each manager's tenure at Chelsea, let's look at their achievements in last decade since Roman took over.
Premier League (3): 04-05, 05-06, 09-10
Champions League (1): 11-12
FA Cup (4): 06-07, 08-09, 09-10, 11-12
League Cup (2): 04-05, 06-07
10 trophies in 10 seasons, not bad really. That's probably only next to Man Utd in England. Let's look at each manager's performance then.
1. Claudio Ranieri -
As shown by his prior and post jobs with respect to Chelsea, Ranieri is a steady-the-ship sort of guy but is not made to win things. He developed the spine of the Chelsea squad [Cech, Makelele, Lampard, Joe Cole, Robben, Duff, Gallas, Wayne Bridge and Crespo who I believe were among the regular starters for the side that won league title after 50yrs. Oh he also brought decent squad players like Parker, Cudicini, Huth, Glen Johnson along with giving debut to John Terry though I’m not sure how much credit he can take from Terry’s inclusion]. He is also the first Chelsea manager to reach European Cup semis. But when a new owner comes, it is inevitable to expect a new manager signing based on the preferences of owners. He had to go.
2. Maureen –
Always feared this guy coz he was extremely good. He can talk the talk and can actually walk the walk [instead of you-know-who]. During his initial days, I felt he could be Chelsea’s Fergie – both managed domestic and continental success with clubs in native countries [Porto were a bit big in Portugal unlike Aberdeen in Scotland, mind] and moved to clubs in England who were dogged with years of underachievement [Utd hadn’t won a league in couple of decades, Chelsea hadn't won league in 50 years], both were hated by rivals. But unlike Fergie, this dude from Portugal had instant success [still believe it was tougher atmosphere for Fergie to come in than what Maureen found in Chelsea’s dressing room]. Not comparing the greatness of two managers, but just a few similarities.
Maureen won a league with record points and fewest goals conceded. Won a couple of FA Cups and League Cups. Though he couldn't beat Ranieri's success in CL [losing in semis at best], there were signs of Maureen carrying on for 10 years and leaving a legacy. Now, he may not come across as a manager who stays long term, but that time, it was fairly early in his career. He seemed like he genuinely loved the club and the players were openly telling us about the bromance. At the least, I thought he could become Chelsea’s Wenga and stay for a decade [Arsene completed 10 years around the same time]. But the problem for Maureen is that his ego is too big to let someone tell him what to do. If he had Sheikhs instead of Roman, he would have stayed a few more years happily pocketing whatever trophies he can win. But Roman is the biggest meddler in the history of meddling in football. As a Utd fan, it was sweet to win 06-07 title over Maureen's side but Shevchenko's transfer and a few other incidents broke the relationship between Roman and Maureen. Alas, what could have been eh?
3. Avram Grant –
Throughout his managerial period with Chelsea, I saw no change with respect to how they played. They seemed to be in auto-Jose mode and kept playing the same way they've known. It was like Stefan Kovacs winning two European Cups with Ajax after Rinus Michels left. I remember him getting dog’s abuse by crowd and media [which game was that where Chelsea home crowd booed a result during the run-in? Probably a 0-0 draw with Everton?]. His interview at that time was recently published by Guardian in their Top 5 Rants by Managers [unsurprisingly, Joe Kinnear at Newcastle came first]. If Terry hadn't kicked the post, maybe Grant could have kept his job – I dunno and I cannot predict what Roman would have done. But Chelsea were trophy less [lost 2-1 in League Cup final to Spurs, lost to Barnsley in FA Cup quarters, lost PL title on last day by 2 pts, lost CL on penalties]. Correct decision to sack him and he later became a Millwall legend [if you know what I mean].
4. Felipe Scolari –
Now, I heard that Roman wants pretty tippy tappy free flowing football that the continental teams regularly play and if that was the necessity, you need to look no further than Scolari. He’s a big name manager too, winning World Cup with Brazil and finishing runners up with Portugal in Euros. His initial side was scoring for fun and beating a lot of teams but then suddenly something went wrong. I don’t remember now, but their results slipped up while they still hovered around the top of the table. Utd weren't helped with Ronaldo's injury and the lack of goal scoring [08-09 title was largely built on a tight defense which broke records for consecutive clean sheets]. Utd also had a fixture pile up coz of their participation in World Club Cup and were lagging quite a bit in the table. Then Chelsea came to visit Utd at Old Trafford and got pasted 3-0. Which I think was what tipped in favor of Scolari’s sacking. I felt he should have been given one more season as it’s difficult to win everything on first try – that was the only season, Chelsea didn't finish in top two till they repeated the same last season. [whether Hiddink was responsible for getting Chelsea into 3rd at the finish is another argument: Arsenal were known to implode on their own (remember 07-08 when they led league for a long time?) and the other sides weren't strong enough to challenge the Big Four hold yet]. Hasty decision, imo.
5. Guus Hiddink –
Had to slot in as interim manager after Scolari's sacking. The players respected him, he got the best out of what he could, won the FA Cup in the end and left due to commitments with national team. If he weren't coaching Anzhi, he’d be waiting in Chelsea’s dressing room by tomorrow noon.
6. Carlo Ancelotti –
Once Hiddink left, Chelsea were still licking their wounds for their unjust loss in CL semis the previous year. If winning CL is an important criteria, Ancelotti is the best bet. He sacrificed Serie A [won only 1 in 7 seasons with Milan] to win 2 CL titles narrowly missing the 3rd [Istanbul, 2005]. Ronaldo left Utd, Benitez started demolishing his own work at Liverpool [a fall from 2nd place in league to 7th at the end of 09-10 I think?]. I credit Ancelotti to be the only manager who was capable to get a season’s best out of Malouda – that deserves a separate praise of its own. His side broke the record for most number of PL goals scored while also breaking the 100-goal barrier in EPL for the first time. FA Cup win was an icing on the cake which brought first ever double in Chelsea’s history.
The way he got sacked left a bad taste in the mouth. He’s not a kiddie, he’s a legendary player and manager, won first ever double for Chelsea but that season saw him lost in CL knockouts to Maureen’s Inter [who went on to win the title]. Okay not bad, check second season. Lost to Utd in quarters – which I think brought his demise. Ancelotti was accused of being tactically naive in both the losses to Inter and Utd but Maureen is no mug when it comes to tactics. Fergie [despite being rubbished by rival fans as a err, rubbish tactician] outsmarted Ancelotti with Giggs-Carrick midfield just like how he outsmarted Scolari in that 3-0 win with Giggs-Fletcher midfield. Ancelotti wouldn't have won 2 CL titles [if Shevchenko remembered to put his scoring boots on, Ancelotti could have won 3 but that’s another argument I’m not willing to partake in right now] without some kind of tactical acumen, at least. Wrong decision, imo.
7. Andre Villas-Boas –
Around this time, Chelsea’s job was considered poisonous around the world [due to recent sackings of Scolari and Ancelotti] but Roman went to the extent of paying 15mE to get his man. AVB was a brilliant manager at Porto, winning the league unbeaten which was only the third instance in Portugal. Capped that off by winning Europa League and domestic cup. He could have been next Maureen at Chelsea if he had a bit more experience and/or a stronger character to rein in players. Based on one of his tactical reports that was flying around Chelsea forums around that time, he came across as a brilliant tactician. Credentials to become a great coach. But in England, there’s this wee thing called ‘manager’ role which the coach is also expected to fill. That came to the detriment of AVB. The results were bad, the players were getting alienated [instead of gradual transition, AVB went for sudden changes; I hope he learns from this mistake] and a disastrous loss in Naples left him hanging by a thread. And it was cut. Didn't even get a season and I wish he did.
8. Roberto Di Matteo –
Contrary to popular opinion on other forums, I do not rate him as an excellent coach. But Chelsea needed a brilliant manager who can be a decent coach at worst. With Di Matteo, they found the perfect man for that particular job. His league results are comparable to Villas-Boas in terms of win percentage, he finished 6th in league, which was like the worst Chelsea result since football got invented in 2003. But what he did was knock out Napoli, which seemed like such an improbable result at that time [Walter Mazzari must be kicking his players for wasting their chances and not winning 6-1 in Naples]. This brought back the belief in the side and when Benfica were knocked out in quarters [Jesus says they were the better side; but Chelsea were more clinical], Di Matteo completely ignored the league to focus on Champions League – san greal – Holy Grail. I was impressed with the performances of Chelsea players in semis vs Barcelona with every player giving their all and playing their heart out – but not necessarily impressed with Di Matteo’s tactics. Barcelona missed a penalty [nothing to do with Chelsea], Tello missed two clear shots on goal [nothing to do with Chelsea], Fabregas missed from 2 yards [nothing to do with Chelsea]. The result was still in Barca’s hands, but they terribly missed Villa’s finishing and can only blame themselves for that. Di Matteo won the FA Cup [they should rename it to Chelsea Cup as they seem to be winning it quite so frequently] and beat Munchen in their own ground [Allianz Arena] at their own game [in penalties] in their own style [scoring at death]. Europe conquered.
The win tipped Hazard’s transfer towards Chelsea and Di Matteo also brought Oscar to complement Mata who has turned out to be such a brilliant player in England [if David Silva got so many plaudits for his first season, think of Mata who has been doing it even more consistently]. Everything is going smooth, Arsenal and Spurs were beaten at their own grounds, the goals were coming but the attacking style became the soft underbelly. This eventually led to exit from Europe in group stages [as Utd found out last season, it’s not so easy to get to knockouts with a weak-ish defence] and Di Matteo's sacking. I still believe he should have been allowed one more season, to correct the mistakes he has made – he’s doesn't come across as someone who’s too daft – it wasn't easy to deal with the transition. Big players from at least half a decade have started deteriorating, some of them even left the club. The current crop need a bit more experience but that’s a luxury Di Matte wasn't afforded. What made this poor decision as a terrible one was the next appointment.
9. Rafael Benitez –
I’d rather not talk about his previous managerial awesomeness [or lack thereof], but this was a massively polarized signing when it came to Chelsea fans. They hated him, they resented him and just because he became their manager now doesn't mean they will have to change their stance. If all the Chelsea fans lapped up Benitez signing, the exact same people who criticize Chelsea fans now would criticize them again and call them hypocrites. For the 2nd time in history, I’m siding with Chelsea fans [first time was when they unveiled Scouse Free Zone banner at Moscow final, 2008 :p]. Chelsea were 4/5 pts off the top spot when he took over, now they are 19 pts behind. If the results keep up, even Spurs can finish ahead of them. Lost the Club World Cup final [though that isn't new to him], blew an excellent chance to win League Cup [with all due respect to Swansea, the Chelsea side shouldn't be losing 2-0 at home], and now comes out blaming the fans, antagonizing them further. He is not new to having problems with the board, not new to wrecking teams and not new to blaming everyone but himself [If you don’t stop booing me, your team will be playing Europa League next season as if the manager isn't responsible for something like that at all].
Sacking managers may have brought titles to Chelsea in Chelsea fans’ opinion, but the first true sacking from Roman came with Maureen and they won only one league title since. Sometimes, the manager needs to be given time but hey ho, who will bell the cat? Who will tell that to Roman?
