England

James White

Since Roman Abramovich took control of Chelsea in 2003 he has made a name for himself as the sugar daddy of football. His vast wealth and generosity has enabled him to turn Chelsea into a real European superpower. Until the mega rich Abu Dhabi Group took control of Manchester City and raised the bar even higher, it was widely accepted that when the aluminium and oil tycoon wanted a player he got him.

Not only did this apply to players but also coaches, boardroom staff and managers. He wasted no time in appointing Peter Kenyon, the man widely credited with Manchester United’s financial rise in the 90s as chief executive of the club and spent £5M bringing Frank Arnesen into a youth scouting role after a brief spell at Tottenham but more notably 10 years at PSV, where he picked up youth players such as Ronaldo, Jaap Stam and Ruud van Nistelrooy to name but a few.

This determination and “at any cost” attitude has been a double edged sword for Chelsea’s managers. There is no denying the benefits of financial muscle when it comes to recruiting new players. It has allowed managers to bring in players the club were previously unable to attract. However, with this power comes pressure. After just six years in control the Russian tycoon recently sacked Luiz Filipe Scolari, his fourth manager and has appointed a fifth in Guus Hiddink. This appointment was first understood to be on a temporary basis however noises coming from the club suggest should it work out the Blues may move to try and secure the Russia coach permanently.

Chelsea have had domestic success with Jose Mourinho in charge, but his defensive football and outspoken manner seemed to fall short of what the oligarch is striving for. It appears he wants European success and or beautiful football. So is Hiddink the man to deliver what the owner wants?

Guus Hiddink has enjoyed great success as a manager. His first managerial role was for three years at PSV Eindhoven (1987-90) where he won three league titles and the club’s first and only European Cup. Admittedly though this was over 20 years ago in a very different footballing era. In his second spell in charge of the Dutch club (2002-05) he again won three league titles and achieved a semi-final place in the Champions League. It is instantly obvious why Hiddink commands God-like status in Eindhoven.

In contrast his domestic achievements outside of Holland have been less impressive. Sacked after just one year in charge (1990-91) of Turkish giants Fenerbahce, followed by an equally unsuccessful three year spell (1991-94) in Spain with Valencia and latterly two unsuccessful six month spells with Real Madrid and Real Betis (1998 and 2000 respectively).

The Dutchman’s teams were renowned for their attacking football, but there is no denying his domestic success has been restricted to a less competitive league and his spell in charge of a technically gifted Dutch national team (1995-1998). The former PSV supremo has had great success in international football guiding South Korea to the World Cup semi-finals, Australia to their first ever World Cup and more recently Russia to the European Championship semi-final, qualifying for the tournament at the expense of England. Unfortunately Abramovich seems to have overlooked the fact that these achievements (as with his Champions League semi-final in 2005) unlike his free flowing football in the Eredivisie, were based on a very similar strategy to that of Jose Mourinho.

Unlike his Brazilian predecessor, Hiddink has a good understanding of the English language but has just three months to work with a team that wouldn’t play for their previous manager. The problem Chelsea now face is a similar one to that Manchester United faced in the 2001/02 season. Sir Alex Ferguson had announced his retirement and the club suffered. The truth is players find it harder to motivate themselves for a manager they know is not around for the long term. Dwight York is a prime example of this. The Trinidad and Tobago international drifted through the 2001/02 season under the impression he would get a new start under a new manager next season. A well known story at the time quoted Ferguson as saying to Yorke, upon his decision to scrap his retirement: “That’s you f****d Yorky!”

So how can Hiddink, who is still employed by the Russian national team, make a difference? Obviously his dual role will mean he has less time to dedicate to his club job than other managers, and in three months time the chances are he will find his contract with Chelsea terminated. This will result in a manager who is not 100% committed running a team that have failed to perform for a permanent manager. Sacking a manager with just 13 games left, after the transfer window has closed and with no long term replacement is the biggest mistake the club has made since parting company with the self proclaimed “Special One”.

Peter Kenyon has, since the day of his appointment, stressed that the club’s long term goal is to become a self sufficient footballing superpower. Unless a manger is given more time and support this will never happen. In the last six years Chelsea have never finished outside the top two in the Premier League, winning two titles and numerous cups. In Europe they have achieved three European Cup semi-finals and one final, yet find themselves on to their fifth manager.

More alarmingly must be the realisation that this season could well be their lowest finishing position since the club became awash with money. The chairman appears less willing to put his hand in his pocket and Manchester City have now become the rich kids in school. Accompanied with Chelsea’s slide down the Deloitte rich list, is it possible that a club that until nine months ago was the richest on the planet may now struggle for a permanent manager, with many looking at the role as a poisoned chalice? Being expected to keep Chelsea in the manner they have become accustomed to on considerably less resources, and with a trigger happy owner, is not one most coaches would relish.

Truth be told, Guus Hiddink may not be the man to save Chelsea but given the timing of Scolari’s departure they did not have too many alternatives.
 

Panathinaikos Centenary Shirt            PSV Eindhoven 08/09 Home Shirt