Hiddink's Anzhi choice says it all

They say you should never meet your heroes.

Or see them sign for Anzhi Makhachkala.

When Guus Hiddink last week signed on to manage the pseudo-Dagestan-based club, it opened the eyes of several admirers to the single greatest driving factor behind his choice of clubs.

Hiddink is held in lofty esteem across most of Australia, the greater part of Holland, significant chunks of Russia, the entirety of South Korea and certain isolated boroughs in West London.  His reputation stretches far further.  He tolerates lesser esteem in Madrid and Turkey.

Since a late-career-defining spell in charge of home nation South Korea at the 2002 World Cup, there have been certain threads which have emerged from his plethora of management appointments.  At his success stories, his charges have been unified and played fluid football true to his football education where his professors were Johans Cruyff and Neeskens.

His managerial stock-in-trade is simple, yet effective: empowerment without toadying.  This took a spirited Australia within minutes of the quarter-finals at Germany 2006 and empowered a fractious Russia unit at Euro 2008.  At club level, his mid-decade PSV Eindhoven units were an Eredivisie power while he’s the only manager this side of Mourinho to coax consistency from the Chelsea cabal.

But with his last half-dozen assignments, the most striking aspect has not been the customary “Hiddink effect” – though that has been there.  What’s most conspicuous is how devoted Guus Hiddink has been to obeying Deep Throat.

Hiddink, like no other manager of the past decade, has been utterly beguiled by cash.  His continued “close” association with Abramovich – and now Suleyman Kerimov – has once and for all exemplified Guus’ priorities beyond the doubts of even his most ardent supporters.  His choice of clubs isn’t predicated upon the “project”, challenge, lifestyle or ambition but purely money.  A reported 12 million pounds can assuage a lot of doubts.

Where others, like Sven-Goran Eriksson, may be opportunistic, dating back to his lucrative Australia deal, Hiddink has specifically chosen positions which offer the highest remuneration.  Especially given his stoush with the Dutch tax agency, he is well within his rights to do so, but such a decision shears away some of the charm that’s made him loved in so many countries. 

A player, coach or administrator is robbed of much of their appeal by a mercenary nature; and despite the patently vast/unresistable/ridiculous sums of money involved in this deal the same is true with Hiddink – a man whose easygoing manner has seen him generally avoid any muck slung his direction.

Accepting the position in charge of Anzhi doesn’t discredit his redoubtable coaching skills, tactical ingenuity or personal integrity.  It just throws his decision-making process into the public eye and lays bare latent reasons that romantic sports fans would prefer remained obscure.  He will be lauded in Australia – also in South Korea, Russia, Chelsea and Holland – but his walk-on-water act has been proven not as the works of the apostle Paul but of Paul Daniels.

In fact, while many or most will wish him well in Dagestan – or Moscow, as the case may be – there is only likely to be one person actively excited for him in his new job.  That’s the man whose own job security was inherently tied to Hiddink’s availability, Chelsea boss and former Abramovich paramour, Andre Villas-Boas.  Villas-Boas, who now displays the same clear thinking that marked Phil Brown’s period as part-time Samaritan.

Since his adroit patch-up job in 2008, Hiddink has been the nominal successor to any floundering Chelsea boss.  Only purest naievete would suggest his acceptance of Dagestani employment was an act of altruism aimed at shoring up Villas-Boas' faltering reign - Guus Hiddink may be many things, but tends to pragmatism, not philanthropy.

To the outsider, there is something unsavoury about the close relationships he enjoys with Russian billionaires.  If clubs such as Chelsea and Anzhi are often seen as playthings, Guus Hiddink becomes by association nothing more than a well-paid Ken doll brought in to complete Kerimov’s brand-new Barbie set.  One can only hope he is content in such a role.

Guus Hiddink leaves Turkey: He's just not that into you

Guus Hiddink's reign as manager of Turkey has ended with nary a whimper. His tenure faded ignominiously into the Black and Aegean Seas: Turkey received 3-0 losses in both legs of the Euro 2012 qualification playoffs from a journeyman Croatia side. He's now a free agent and joins Carlo Ancelotti as the biggest - and most marketable - free agent in his profession.

It would surprise no-one were he to return to Chelsea in a Director's role, creating with Andre Villas-Boas a management "Dream Team". Rumours of him taking over as manager, however, are greatly overstated.

It was always likely Hiddink would depart the Bosphorus nation should Turkey fail to qualify. This is in part due to his meandering nature and wandering eye; also because it became apparent nearly from the start that this partnership wasn't nearly as affectionate as past flings with Russia, Chelsea, PSV, Australia and South Korea. Fittingly, in his last home match, he was booed by Turkish crowds.

For the first time in the decade since he ascended from "coach" to "miracle worker", he's criticised his former employers on departure, saying Turkish youth development pathways weren't of sufficient standard for consistent performance at international level.

It marked the second time that Hiddink leaves Turkey without adding to his reputation: in 1991 he was dismissed from Fenerbahçe with a win rate of only 40%. In seventeen games with the Ay Yıldızlılar, he compiled an patchy seven wins, five draws and five losses (41.18%). Both numbers stand well below his career win percentage of 56.52.

Questions are now being asked if the Dutchman's magic has worn thin. His last two jobs have finished unsatisfactorily with Russia and Turkey enduring qualification playoff defeats. Even understanding the "Fool me once, fool me twice" mindset, this analysis is premature and, at worst, a little mean-spirited. As in most break-ups, both parties eventually realised they were just wrong for each other in the first place.

Looking at his greatest achievements (with the exception of his first stint at PSV), Hiddink and his teams have performed best when unfancied and under little pressure. It should be the first rule of football - never bet against a Guus Hiddink team.

Over the last decade, he coaxed a Euro 2008 semi-final berth out of Russia when outsiders didn't know what to expect. When expectations rose after players like Arshavin and Pavlyuchenko got moves to high-profile clubs, the squad underperformed and went down to Slovenia in a winner-takes-all bout over two legs for a place at the 2010 World Cup.

At Chelsea, he was recruited to salvage the season after Luis Felipe Scolari's dismissal. With minimal pressure - it was a temporary appointment and everyone was aware the title had long gone - he once again attained maximal results.

His quotes on masterminding a gritty, but not overly talented Australia to the second round of the 2006 Cup could define his coaching career: "Our goal is the second round. Why not?" Fourth place in 2002 with then-tiny South Korea was nigh-on miraculous. By fostering belief in his players, Guus Hiddink has spent the past decade getting the best out of underdogs with reasonable expectations.

After a stupendous Euro 2008, both Turkey and Russia had reason to be ambitious in expectation. However, this was followed by failure to qualify for South Africa despite quality players and enviable home-field advantages. It should have worked - but didn't. No-one manages expectation like Hiddink - so when it becomes rampant, his work becomes more difficult and less masterly in its execution.

We'll see Guus Hiddink again soon. Rumours persist of a 22 million pound offer to manage Anzhi Makhachkala. If he cares to protect his Lama-like coaching reputation, he won't take that job. It's too glitzy, too dangerous and just not his type.

Samuel Eto'o moves to Russia's Anzhi Makhachkala

Cameroon forward Samuel Eto'o has moved from Serie A's Inter Milan to Russian Premier League side Anzhi Makhachkala, bringing to an end a two-year Italian sojourn which saw him win the Chammpions' League for the third time.

He joins a team which since an ownership change early this year has made a number of audacious bid for stars, most notably for Brazilian starlet Neymar.

courtesy: dailymail.co.uk

With his transfer now confirmed, Eto'o will play alongside fellow high-paid players such as Russia's Yuri Zhirkov, formerly of Chelsea; Hungary forward Balasz Dzsudzsak and immortal Brazilian left back Roberto Carlos. Anzhi, in their second year back in the Russian Premier League, have spent a reported €25 million of new owner Suleyman Kerimov's hard-earned billions on the four-time African Player of the Year. The deal will make him amongst - if not the - highest paid player in the world.

At age 30 and having achieved (nearly) everything possible for an African player, he has agreed a deal to move to a region of Russia which has developed a reputation for violence. Russia, with a rapidly improving top division should provide enough challenges for Eto'o and a fiscal package far in excess of what he'd be able to earn at the Nerazzurri.

Though he has signed, any security concerns the Cameroon national may harbor have not been totally assuaged. Roberto Carlos recently came out saying the region's security situation was far improved and overstated - however this must be superimposed upon his own experience after receiving death threats while playing for Corinthians. This article from the Independent explains the situation particularly well.

Russian football has also suffered from outbreaks of racial intolerance. Having faced such bigotry before, Eto'o may have to do so again. In essence, he has sacrificed competition and perhaps an element of security by signing on in Dagestan. If he feels comfortable with rumours of armed insurgency, then the only sacrifice is of competition.

Samuel Eto'o has won everything there is to win: an Olympic Gold Medal, two European trebles and three UCL wins amongst numerous domestic titles and cups. When Inter Milan shaping up as a good but not particularly great side this year, what does he have to fuel his competitive instincts? Better to take the money - and the prospect of building a winner - in Russia.

For him, one final, massive, payday is worth any potential risks.