Apr 15

‘Not a problem’ if Chelsea sack me in May, admits Carlo Ancelotti

• ‘I always respect the decision of the club,’ says Italian
• Manager calls for strong end to season from his players

Carlo Ancelotti has accepted his share of responsibility for what will end as the worst season Chelsea have endured in the Roman Abramovich era and admitted it would “not be a problem” if the owner decided to sack him at the end of the campaign.

Elimination from the Champions League by Manchester United in midweek has left Chelsea with seven league games to achieve, realistically, a second-place finish at best. Abramovich and the chief executive, Ron Gourlay, are intent upon reviewing the campaign in full next month before formally announcing a decision on the Italian’s future, though it is expected that he will become the sixth manager to depart Stamford Bridge over the oligarch’s eight-year ownership.

Ancelotti was admirably dignified in addressing his precarious situation yesterday but, with shades of the inevitability of Claudio Ranieri’s departure from the club in 2004, appeared somewhat resigned to his fate. “The club can judge the job I’ve done,” he said. “If they decide at the end of the season that it was not good enough, they have to change. Without problem. I always respect the decision of the club. I have a contract [to 2012] and everyone knows this but, at the end of the season, the club can decide if I am to continue here or if they want to change. For me, this is not a problem.”

There was an admission that he had been well aware of his employers’ recent reputation for dismissing managers – “I know the history of Chelsea,” he said – and an insistence that the owner should take into account his achievements in claiming the club’s first Premier League and FA Cup Double last season before making his decision. Yet he acknowledged, too, his own failings over a traumatic campaign.

“I could do better, I could do better,” he said. “But I don’t have to justify anything because I’ve been working here for two years. So what do I have to justify? Nothing. I try to do my best every time. I don’t know if he will make a decision over just this year or over my two years here. I think it should be judged over two.

“It’s not the moment now to make a decision if I stay or go because, now, it is not possible to make a decision with a ‘cold’ mind. It’s better to wait and see what happens at the end of the season. I have plans for the team next season, I’m sure, but I haven’t spoken about those [with the owner] yet. I hope I have the chance to discuss them. I don’t know if this is fair or unfair on me. I’m not the right person to judge that. I’m just doing a job here and the club have to decide if that job has been good enough.”

It has been suggested that Ancelotti’s apparent indifference to being sacked is evidence of a lack of commitment to Chelsea, particularly as a substantial pay-off for the remaining year on his contract would be due. It is, though, more a reflection of the culture he is used to back in Italy, where his eight-year stint in charge of Silvio Berlusconi’s Milan bucked the general trend. “I come from a country where they don’t think continuity is the right way,” he said. “But what is the most important thing for a club, and for a manager, is to have a good relationship with the owner. If this relationship is not good, you have to change. Until now, the relationship with the owner at Chelsea is fantastic. He has supported me this season when we haven’t achieved important results. Until now, this relationship has been fantastic.

“If, at the end of the season, the owner decides the job I did was not good enough, this is not a problem. I know football. I know clubs sometimes want to change the manager. I will continue to try to do my best because I want to stay here. And if there is any possibility of doing that, I will be happy.”

His best chance of seeing out his contract would appear to lie in the lack of obvious high-calibre candidates to replace him, though while the Italian’s mood yesterday suggested he expected to be leaving the club. , Hhe remains intent on seeing out the season with a flourish, starting with Saturday’s tricky trip to West Bromwich Albion. “We have to use this game as a measure of our character, our personality, our strength,” he added. “It’s easy to prepare for a semi-final in the Champions League and harder to be motivated for this kind of game. But it is a good opportunity to show everyone that we are strong and have character.”

Carlo AncelottiChelseaDominic Fifieldguardian.co.uk

Comments Off | Tags: , , , , , , ,
Apr 12

The Question: What has gone wrong for Fernando Torres at Chelsea? | Jonathan Wilson

The Spaniard looks like a vanity signing for Roman Abramovich and he will struggle unless he is deployed as a lone striker

Football is not a predictable game. A team can have 20 chances and still lose to a side that musters only one. All a coach can do is manipulate the percentages as best he can in his favour. With that caveat in mind, though, a prediction: in the next decade, no side will win a major international tournament playing an orthodox 4-4-2.

When a good side play with three central midfielders, whether in a 4-2-3-1 or a 4-3-3 (or either of their close cousins, 4-2-1-3 and 4-1-2-3), they will almost inevitably dominate possession against a side playing only two central midfielders. The old defence of a high offside line simply is not as effective as it used to be thanks to the liberalisation of the rule. Even if the three do not dominate possession, fielding only two central midfelders leaves a side vulnerable if one of those central players pushes forward, a problem that dogged Manchester United in European competition for much of the late 1990s (the defeats to Borussia Dortmund in 1997, Monaco in 1998 and Real Madrid in 2000; the success of 1999 might have been less fraught with a more cautious approach), and could be glimpsed again in the nervy final minutes of the last-16 victory over Marseille.

It was notable that in the first leg of the Champions League quarter-final, as soon as Chelsea switched from 4-4-2 to 4-3-3, so too did Manchester United, matching them shape-for-shape rather than offering numerical superiority in the centre. Nonetheless, Chelsea had much their best spell in that final 20 minutes. Even Fernando Torres looked sharper, drawing a superb save from Edwin van der Sar with a header back across goal, and flicking the ball on for Ramires leading to the incident in which Patrice Evra got away with a foul on the Brazilian on the 18-yard line. This raises the question of why Chelsea have switched to a 4-4-2.

The lesson of Vienna

One of the oddities of Euro 2008 was that Spain played their best football without their top scorer. David Villa got five goals in Spain’s first four games, but it was after he was injured 34 minutes into the semi-final against Russia that Spain produced their best football. Villa was replaced by Cesc Fábregas, and the extra man in midfield – a switch from 4-1-3-2 to 4-1-4-1 – allowed Spain to pen in Russia’s full-backs, Alexander Anyukov and Yuri Zhirkov, who had looked threatening in the opening stages. The change also allowed Torres to operate as a lone forward. He promptly produced his best performance of a tournament in which he had begun to draw criticism as Spain won 3-0, and topped that with his display against Germany in the final.

The lesson seemed clear: Torres is at his best operating alone. He is quick, and so adept on the counterattack, he offers enough physical presence to hold the ball up, and he is intelligent enough in his use of the ball to bring runners from deep into play. He seemed at the time the model of a modern centre-forward. That was how he was used most successfully at Liverpool, which raises the question of why, since he joined Chelsea, he has so persistently been used in a 4-4-2.

Other issues

The formation is not the only problem, clearly. Football is littered with examples of forwards – Ronaldo, Alan Shearer, Michael Owen – who have lost a fraction of pace after a major operation. It is to be hoped that Torres is not one of them, but he is discernibly slower than he was 18 months ago. With the European Championship, the Confederations Cup and the World Cup, it is 2007 since he had a proper summer break. Others in the Spain squad, of course, have been subjected to a similarly hectic schedule (although the intensity of the Premier League probably makes those based in England more prone to fatigue), but the combination of tiredness and injury is a debilitating combination – as Andriy Shevchenko found in his days at Chelsea.

Then there is the great intangible of confidence. Coming back from his operation, Torres had a poor World Cup, which perhaps made him doubt his recovery. He needed to return to a calm, stable club where he could feel his way back in to form, but instead he went back to a Liverpool whose ownership was being decided in the courts and at which a lame duck manager was being hammered by fans and players alike. Whatever you think of the rights and wrongs of Torres leaving Anfield, the environment was not conducive to a player in need of reassurance. He was out of form, but, as in previous seasons, he was expected to be one of the two or three players to drag the team to respectability.

Moving to Chelsea has only increased the pressure. He has again joined a club scrabbling for form, only this time he has done so with the expectation that a £50m price-tag brings, and without any of the goodwill brought by memories of past performances. Patrick Barclay raised the suggested this weekend that Torres may prove to be the worst transfer in the history of football and, while it would be absurd to write him off this early, that could easily turn out to be the case. The current holder of that title is probably Shevchenko – 47 largely desultory appearances for Chelsea after a £30m move – which suggests lessons have not been learned.

Mourinho’s ghost

Money does not bring wisdom. Centre-forwards are glamorous and exciting, and it is understandable that a man who can effectively buy what he wants should acquire too many. Shevchenko and Torres, though, have become to Abramovich what the gold taps were to Saddam Hussein. Since Mourinho’s time, Chelsea’s squad have been geared to play 4-1-2-3 – something that is particularly true of the midfield. With a holding player, Frank Lampard and Michael Essien have licence to get forward and provide a goal threat from deep.

There has been a slight evolution, in that Mourinho preferred his full-backs to sit relatively deep and operated with genuine wide-forwards in Arjen Robben and Damien Duff, while more modern incarnations have had Nicolas Anelka playing half-wide on the right and the muscular presence of Florent Malouda on the left with much of the width provided by the full-backs. The basic shape, though, remains the same. Luiz Felipe Scolari and Ancelotti have both attempted to change formation; one was ousted and one ended up going back to 4-1-2-3. Perhaps Avram Grant did little management in getting Chelsea to the 2008 Champions League final, but at least he had the wit not to change a shape that worked.

Torres’s arrival, though, seems to have brought an edict that Ancelotti must play both him and either Didier Drogba or Nicolas Anelka in the biggest games. Not only does that not suit either forward, but 4-4-2 does not suit the rest of the squad. Lampard needs a holder behind him to be able to make the forward runs that have brought him so many goals. Whether Florent Malouda or Yuri Zhirkov plays on the left, with Ramires shuttling on the right, there is a dearth of creative spark. Ancelotti, quite rightly, attacked those players who were trying to win Saturday’s game against Wigan single-handedly and called for greater “teamwork”, but his real problem, surely, is that the team does not work.

Yes, Torres is clearly anxious to make an impression, score his first goal for the club and stop the clock on his barren period, but even if the whole squad are in form, it is hard to see how the present squad can play fluently in a 4-4-2 (and even if they do, they would probably be too open to win a major competition).

Perhaps the logic is that, at 32, Drogba is nearing the end of his career – although he was a later starter in professional football which may prolong his effectiveness – and Torres is seen as his long-term replacement. Even then, though, as this analysis by Miguel Delaney highlights, Chelsea may not have the players to get the best out of him. Torres is not a Drogba figure who will win high balls; he thrives on through balls and low crosses (and note how his few good moments on Saturday were related to the involvement of Yossi Benayoun). Perhaps Torres is only the first of a flock of signings, but if so it seems almost cruel to have exposed him before the support structure is in place.

If the intention is to build a new team around Torres, it seems a remarkable gamble given there is no guarantee he will fully recover the form of 18 months ago. And if the intention was for Torres to replace Drogba, of course, there should be no compulsion to play him. He could come off the bench, slowly feeling his way into the role he would occupy next season. All of which suggests that Torres is, like Shevchenko, at least in part a vanity signing by Abramovich. That is not good for the player, and it is not good for Chelsea.

Fernando TorresChelseaJonathan Wilsonguardian.co.uk

Comments Off | Tags: , , , ,
Nov 04

Carlo Ancelotti can help Chelsea avoid falling down the same old holes | Paul Hayward

Chelsea’s manager can dispel the sense of fatalism that haunts his team’s Champions League efforts

In Europe, Chelsea are like Unlucky Alf, the Fast Show character who always fell down the uncovered manhole despite spotting it 30 yards ahead. A malign universe has thrown all sorts of pratfalls in the path of the English champions, from John Terry’s slip on the penalty spot in the 2008 Moscow final to Tom Henning Ovrebo’s refereeing freak show in a home semi-final against Barcelona 12 months later.

Like Alf, Chelsea’s followers must fight off fatalism. For some the sight of José Mourinho reprising his infamous Old Trafford touchline gallop – in Milan last night – must have thrown up a new gallery of torments. This year’s kick in the unmentionables: a Mourinho-inspired Real Madrid take over from Barça as the team to send Didier Drogba into a ban-earning tantrum.

Is there a rota of indignities for Chelsea in the Champions League, the trophy they most covet? If you listen to Terry, who was reduced to a weeping wreck by his missed penalty against Manchester United in Roman Abramovich’s home town, Chelsea’s Russian owner is not uniquely obsessed with European domination.

Earlier in a campaign that has propelled Chelsea into the knockout rounds with two games to spare, Terry said: “The owner’s message at the start of the season was clear. He wants to win everything. And with the squad we have here at Chelsea he expects that to happen. We can’t prioritise one competition ahead of the other. We can’t choose between winning the Premier League and the Champions League.”

As we saw at the World Cup with his failed palace coup, Terry is not one for diplomatic sub-texts, and may have missed the purpose of Abramovich’s declaration. A close association with Vladimir Putin and a deep knowledge of Kremlinology is not required to see that if you give today’s Premier League footballer a mandate to chase one target to the exclusion of all others he will take you up on the offer, with potentially ruinous consequences in other competitions.

To “prioritise” openly a first European title would be to diminish the importance of retaining the Premier League trophy Chelsea won along with the FA Cup in Carlo Ancelotti’s first year in charge. It would say the domestic conquest is already taken care of and that standing on the throats of Real Madrid and Barcelona would complete the quest.

The End of History is not something you want to be encouraging when the bill so far is more than £600m.

Ashley Cole sees this. “It’s always the Premier League, for me,” Cole said when asked this week whether Uefa’s giant vase was the real fixation. Talking it up risks bringing it down again. Four semi-final defeats since 2004 and an excruciating near-miss two years back are the kind of ordeals to twist any soul, and none has been wound more tightly than Drogba’s. Slapping United’s Nemanja Vidic in Moscow was only the prelude to his prime-time rap to camera after Ovrebo’s ineptitude had helped Barcelona through at Stamford Bridge in May 2009.

So the Big D serves as a barometer for Chelsea’s feelings about club football’s most prestigious prize. Appointing him captain for this week’s 4-1 win over Spartak Moscow was an affirmation of Chelsea’s impressive equanimity. For a long time after his departure Mourinho probably assumed his Chelsea sides were unsurpassable but this one is superior in ambition and execution.

The Wembley final in May and the absence of any London team on the list of European champions are superficial extra motivations, which Ancelotti invoked after the Spartak Moscow game. This is him going along with a script. In his all-black touchline ensemble, Ancelotti comes over as the dark rider of Abramovich’s craving. Another myth. He will swing the other way next spring if he sees his more excitable players fall for talk of hunting down the grail.

Ancelotti, you remember, has no personal need to frame his life as a Sisyphean endeavour. He had his hands on the Champions League silver as recently as three years ago, when his Milan side beat Liverpool in Athens. While Terry and Drogba thrash on their moorings, their manager can recall four European conquests as player or coach.

Abramovich hired him for his European knowhow. Just as important will be his knowledge of how-not-to. There is no CV on earth that can protect a team from an Ovrebo and no conceivable solace for a side who fell within one penalty kick of losing their Champions League virginity. But Ancelotti comes without this festering history of misfortune and resentment and is unlikely to allow desire to mutate into anxiety.

The holes are out there (Mourinho is digging a fresh one) but Chelsea are not doomed to tumble down one. Not with Ancelotti keeping a look-out.

ChelseaChampions LeaguePaul Haywardguardian.co.uk

Comments Off | Tags: , , , , , , ,
« Previous Page Next Page »