jonv Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 I only care about the replacement unless it's Chelsea getting a manager that puts a club back in the scrap. Like a resurgent West Ham. If Zola ships out I can't see them getting in a better replacement and the club really would be in a heap.
This thread is brought to you by theterracestore.com Enter code `BRFCS` at checkout for an exclusive discount!
leftfooter Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 No it has become this ridiculous in recent years. A terrible shame that a sport with its roots buried deep in working society and which has meant so much to so many people has become nothing more than a rich man's plaything. Football lost its soul many years ago, the whole thing is a joke. Which takes us back to Chelsea, the laughing stock of world football. Criteria for being a successful Chelsea manager? Simple. Win trophies, preferably the CL and PL on a regular basis Win these trophies while playing attractive entertaining football Do this is such a manner the support place the glory for the trophies at Abramovich's feet not the manager's Never allow yourself to become bigger or more important than the owner It seems Abramovich, for all his wealth, has a gap in his life. He wants popularity, needs to be loved if you like, a true poor little rich boy. For all his efforts, and I think he's bored with it all, Chelsea have achieved little, he's not taken seriously, a figure of fun for us to ridicule. That is the problem for any Chelsea manager to solve, satisfy Abramovich's ego and desire by making him loved by the people. Chlesea had the right manager in Mourhino. They won't find another. Indeed. The Premier League has no soul. Keith Burkinshaw's infamous comment is apt. As manager Spurs with Ardiles, Villa and Glenn Hoddle he won two successive FA Cups (81 & 82). In his final game, Spurs won the UEFA Cup (1984), defeating Anderlecht after a penalty shoot-out. His reward was the sack. He was northern and unfashionable and perhaps didn't fit Spurs' cororate profile. On leaving White Hart Lane for the last time, apparently after a disagreement with the board, he remarked "There used to be a football club there". Chelsea will end up like Spurs.
jim mk2 Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 His reward was the sack. He was northern and unfashionable and perhaps didn't fit Spurs' cororate profile. Burkinshaw walked away from Spurs ; he wasn't sacked.
thenodrog Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 Burkinshaw walked away from Spurs ; he wasn't sacked. Managers walking away on principle without waiting for a bloody great pay out!?! Those were the days eh?
tony gale's mic Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 Rijkaard's said he's open to an approach, although a sticking point may be that he's looking for a long term job while Roman wants a short term appointment.
leftfooter Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 Burkinshaw walked away from Spurs ; he wasn't sacked. Yeah, it's called constructive dismissal. It amounts to the same thing.
nicko Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 The guy on The Times is usually quite good on Chelsea...his story today has certain lines that emerged yesterday and are pretty accurate. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle5697930.ece As for the Sky Sports News balls this morning...remember the Roque episode.
tony gale's mic Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 The guy on The Times is usually quite good on Chelsea...his story today has certain lines that emerged yesterday and are pretty accurate. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle5697930.ece As for the Sky Sports News balls this morning...remember the Roque episode. Do you think this short term issue could be a big sticking point for Riijkaard from what you've heard? His agent has come out and said he'd be willing to talk to Chelsea but they'd only want a long term deal. Given that almost everyone else has ruled themselves out then it would seem like Riijkaard would have to be the massive favourite...
T4E Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 There seems to be certain comparisons emerging between the Chelsea and Newcastle managerial positions. Anyone that manages Newcastle is widely thought to be keeping the seat warm for the eventual arrival of Alan Shearer. Will the next Chelsea manager just be holding the fort until all concerned are convinced that Zola (with Clarke in tow) is ready for the job?
nicko Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 I don't get the 'short-term' thing at all... Abramovich IS planning a major spend-up on new players in the summer, so surely the new guy would be better if he was there for the long-term. Still, football and logic are strangers these days.
Sandiway Blue Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 I don't get the 'short-term' thing at all... Abramovich IS planning a major spend-up on new players in the summer, so surely the new guy would be better if he was there for the long-term. Still, football and logic are strangers these days. Who do you think will the job Alan?
jim mk2 Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 Yeah, it's called constructive dismissal. It amounts to the same thing. Not true. Burkinshaw resigned.
tony gale's mic Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 It is hard to see past Mancini and Riijkaard...
MCMC1875 Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 So how many Prem clubs have changed manager this season now?
tony gale's mic Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 So how many Prem clubs have changed manager this season now? Lots. But only one of them did it with racist motives.
philipl Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 BBC are reporting that Chelsea and Hiddink are talking and Hiddink saying it is the only club he would move to becasse he knows the owner. This surprises me. Amazing that a football management appointment casts a light on geo-politics but this says that Putin is in trouble in Russia for real.
philipl Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 Hiddink to be temporary at Chelski and continue as Russian Manager I'd be a bit worried if I were Kenyon having a Manager able to converse with Abramovich in Russian.
leftfooter Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 BBC are reporting that Chelsea and Hiddink are talking and Hiddink saying it is the only club he would move to becasse he knows the owner. This surprises me. Amazing that a football management appointment casts a light on geo-politics but this says that Putin is in trouble in Russia for real. Putin's made the error of appointing himself as Prime Minister. Constitutionally he had to give way to the political fiction that Medvedev is President. Of course that's a sham. The problem is however that Putin as President traditionally used the PM's office as a scapegoat when times were tough. In effect, to use the usual ploy he'd be sawing the branch he's sitting on. Putin himself is not in trouble. He's salted a conservative 50 Billion dollars out of the Russian economy. Then of course there are the other cronies who've also had their snouts firmly in the trough. The Russian economy itself however is spiralling out of control. They produce little except for raw materials. Drunk with success and the adulation of an eviscerated media, Putin recently ordered a massive increase in military spending when oil was approaching 150 US$ a barrel. It's now of course hurtling towards 35 US$. That means of course that somebody has to start to pay up. Russia is virtually a gangster state run by thugs. It's no coincidence that both Abramovich and Gaydamak have been spending large amounts of time recently in the Motherland and no doubt the Kremlin is leaning on them (as well as the other robber barons) to pay up...or else. Whatever Abramovich ends up forking out for the services of Hiddink, will far exceed his actual value. Tythes must be paid in some form by the Barons to the King.
Ozz Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 Leftfooter-Check your tea and coffee isn't glowing next time you have a brew!
leftfooter Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 Leftfooter-Check your tea and coffee isn't glowing next time you have a brew!
CrazyIvan Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 I would hope that politics has little to do with football management but in the multi-cultural Premier League that is certainly not the case. Scolari being canned proves that football clubs are the play-things of rich and they do exactly what they wish with them when they wish. I feel sorry for Scolari and I hope we see him back in Premier League management at some point because I found him, like Mourinho, entertaining.
philipl Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 Thaksin Shinawatra at Man City obviously had a political agenda.
deftangel Posted February 10, 2009 Posted February 10, 2009 Leftfooter's post is interesting but can someone elaborate as to what Hiddink's potential appointment has to do with Russian politics? That's not a "stay on topic " barb, I just don't see the connection... Surely Hiddink would have the same problem as Scolari clearly did, adapting to club management after a long time spent managing at International level. Especially if the desire is for instant impact to win trophies. The "new manager effect" won't last till the Champions League final if they get there.
neekoy Posted February 11, 2009 Posted February 11, 2009 Any other potential names nicko? Hiddink's being touted but I would've thought Roman won't repeat his mistake of going for an excellent international manager with not as much club experience... 10 Domestic titles and 2 Continental titles? If he is available then Huddink has to be the pick, but long term still think Rijkaard
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.