Time for Mourinho to go?

[David Johnson]

Well it has been a really grim season for Chelsea supporters.

Boring football expert, Mourinho back in charge. Even players like Hazard are pointing out Chelsea are not set up to be an attacking side. And no trophies.

Previously Benitez managed Chelsea to a Europa Cup win. Before Benitez, Roberto di Matteo managed Chelsea to an FA Cup and Champions League wins.

Is Mourinho getting paid for failure? Of course he is. He blames everybody apart from himself - Chelsea players, referees, linesmen, the mechanism for overseeing referee performance.

It is doubtful whether Abramovich will allow this boring football to continue with no trophies. He hasn't allowed it in previous Chelsea managers.

Maybe Abramovich will get Tony Pulis in to improve team spirit and get Chelsea playing attacking football again. You might even get Chelsea fans creating a bit of atmosphere in the ground as opposed to checking their share prices or how much their houses have gone up in value since yesterday.

Bob SIngleton, you know it makes sense!

!wink!

[cockneygeezer2009]

Lol. I guess this post is an attack on Chelsea fans. Mourinho is popular down the Bridge. Can't see why Abramovich would sack him. Not like Chelsea did a Man Utd this season.

Talking about Mourinho and his style of play will you be watching the World Cup DJ? Watching England play isn't exactly edge of your seat stuff either.

[Milk Tray Man]

Abramaovich won't need to sack him, he'll probably fuck off of his own accord before too long anyway. he has a lot of previous and not just with Chelsea.

[Bob Singleton]

What a short (and highly selective) memory some have.

Earlier in the season Chelsea were playing some very attacking football... just not putting away the chances that were created. A few times (such as against Everton and Villa) Mourinho took Cole off and switched to a 3-4-3/3-5-2 style of formation in order to get goals.

After the Sunderland cup game, Mourinho decided to take the pragmatic approach... attacking whilst soft at the back was leaving the team vulnerable and Chelsea were drawing/losing games they should have won, so he made the team harder to beat. Nothing wrong with that given the resources available.

Chelsea are some 20 points better off than last season, and instead of being out of the running in the league in November/December, the club were still in with a shout with a couple of games to go. That's progress. As for losing a Champions League semi-final... yes, I can see that being a "failure" in the eyes of non-Chelsea fans with an axe to grind. However, at the beginning of the season the vast majority of Chelsea fans would have been happy with an improved league showing and a good run in the CL... and that's what we got. If Chelsea are to feel any disappointment it's that (along with Liverpool and Man City) the team dropped stupid points. The club also didn't do as well as might have been hoped in the League or FA Cups. Overall though, it's progress on last year.

I seriously doubt that Abramovich will dismiss Mourinho for not winning anything this season, and the press reports about him sacking all his previous managers for "failure" are actually wide of the mark. Avram Grant was only ever going to be a caretaker manager, and even if Terry hadn't slipped, but instead scored the penalty in Moscow and Chelsea had won the CL that year, Grant would STILL have been gone! Robbie di Matteo will forever be a club legend, but most sensible fans would have told you he wasn't cut out to manage such a large club (tell me... where is he managing at the moment?). Other than no-one else was really available, Abramovich should never have given that sentimental contract extension for the following season.

As for Mourinho blaming everyone else... again somewhat wide of the mark. Personally I think he's justified in having a go at some of the refereeing decisions (and Chelsea haven't been alone in questioning the pretty poor standards this year). Referees have, on the whole, been pretty inconsistent this season... not just between the interpretations of one ref against another on the same weekend, but the way some referees have given yellow cards to some players in a game and allowed far worse tackles to go unpunished a few minutes later. I'm not just talking about games involving Chelsea, but across the whole league. The standard of refereeing, given they are now professionals, has been dire, and the PGMOL have allowed poor referees and poor decisions to remain unquestioned. The thing is that if Ferguson had criticised the refs in a similar manner, the FA would have done nothing but maybe issue a statement that such remarks were "unhelpful". The FA themselves have been inconsistent regarding off the ball incidents and the various fines/bans handed out to players and coaching staff.

As for "boring football"... from all your previous posts all I can deduce is that, in your book, the more goals the better. As I've already said, I found Chelsea's 6-0 demolition of Arsenal far more boring than the "edge of your seats" game against Liverpool. If you want lots of scoring, go and watch basketball. Even though Chelsea lost, I also found much of the Atletico game fascinating (it only became "boring" when the 3rd Atletico goal went in, when it was obvious only one side could progress and there was nothing left for either side to play for) Everyone will have a different definition of what is "boring" or not, but I bet a few Liverpool supporters are wishing they'd reverted to Mourinho's "boring" style of football once they were 3-0 up against Palace!

Football is not just about attacking, but also about defending... a lesson some managers need to learn, and one which David Johnson also needs to learn, otherwise he'll never appreciate the game for all that it can offer.

I'm off now to watch replays of Stevie Me falling over and 3 Crystal Palace goals

[Sam Slater]

Do you think this trophyless season is party Mourinho's fault, Bob?

Spent all summer chasing Rooney when it was clear Man Utd weren't going to let him go. I thought that was as stupid as Man Utd chasing Fabregas. Chelsea ended up with nothing and Man Utd ended up with panic buying Fellaini.

[David Johnson]

Well I think Mourinho is popular largely for his achievements last time he was at Chelsea.

As for Abramovich sacking him, he sacked di Matteo after 9 months even though Chelsea won an FA Cup and Champions League final with him. And Mourinho's last spell at Chelsea ended in tears.

As for watching the World Cup, I will indeed be watching all the England games, like the sucker for punishment that I am. However my attitude to England has changed completely in the last 10 or more years. In the nineties I had high hopes but since then I expect nothing from the England team and typically that is what they deliver.

[David Johnson]

Ah forgot to mention that Mourinho has a tendency to blame the owners after awhile, so yes, unless Abramovich forks out squillions for a few forwards, he could well be moaning at him next.

[David Johnson]

I take it that you don't think Tony Pulis is a goer then? Interesting to see how Ancelotti has done with Real Madrid after Mourinho went.

How about Gus Poyet? He will get Chelsea playing football unlike Mourinho who will want Abramovich to spend the equivalent of the GNP of Chad to help him out after a trophy-less season.

If Abramovich doesn't deliver we will get yet more endless moaning about his players, referees, other managers, the owner, little horses needing milk, teams that play "19th century football", blahdy, blahdy, blah.

So hopefully he will get the boot.

[Bob Singleton]

Sam Slater wrote:

> Do you think this trophyless season is party Mourinho's fault,
> Bob?
>
> Spent all summer chasing Rooney when it was clear Man Utd
> weren't going to let him go. I thought that was as stupid as
> Man Utd chasing Fabregas. Chelsea ended up with nothing and Man
> Utd ended up with panic buying Fellaini.
>


The difference between chasing Rooney and chasing Fabregas is that there were alternatives available to Fabregas Man Utd could have gone after.

Rooney was the only choice, tenuous though it may have been. PSG were willing to pay ridiculous money for Cavani and Monaco were paying Falcao huge wages thanks to not having any tax to pay. Can anyone suggest a striker that was available last summer of the quality of Roney, Cavani or Falcao? That's why Chelsea stuck with Torres (who nobody was interested in buying anyway) and Ba and brought in Eto'o when Lukaku was effectively demanding a starting spot. With the World Cup looming, I can understand why he wanted guarantees of playing time. The club said they couldn't guarantee anyone playing time as their performances in training and games would be the ultimate factor.

Chasing Rooney was a waste of time, yes... but given the lack of other options it was the only thing to do.

[Bob Singleton]

David, there are many on Chelsea forums who think Pullis deserves the Manager of The Year award for what he's done at Palace. However he's not what Chelsea need.

I'm a big fan of Ancelloti and personally wish he was still managing Chelsea... but Jose will do for now