Rafael Benítez, Hired Goon

Chelsea manager Rafael Benítez is in a tough spot.  In fact, he’d probably be the first to admit it, though it would come with a caveat: often trial is accompanied by opportunity.

Benítez arrived at Chelsea in November, tasked with renewing a project with its genesis in former boss Andre Villas-Boas: the refreshment and gentrification of a team with roots reaching back to the Claudio Ranieri era – that is, eight years and eight managers ago.  The former Liverpool manager is neither liked at Stamford Bridge nor blessed with long-term job security: comments made of Chelsea supporters have hardly endeared himself to the Blues faithful, while Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich appears to have a thing for former Barcelona manager Pep Guardiola.

The first two players seemingly to be moved on are stalwarts Ashley Cole and Frank Lampard, neither of whom have been offered new contracts despite their current deals expiring in June. Cole has been more vocal, as is his wont – indeed, he probably has more currency still being near the peak of his powers and retaining his position as England’s left-back.  In contrast, while both sides have leaked information concerning a lack of contract negotiations, Lampard himself has been relatively quiet, by default claiming the moral high ground as a club champion ushered out the door before his time.

Sources suggested it was Benítez’s personal relationship with Abramovich that allowed him to take the manager’s role.  After being out of work for nearly two years, it was a low-risk: do what Roman wanted and if everything works out, take control of the club in the long(er) term; at worst, Rafa could – and has, somewhat – proved his big-club bona fides after an ill-fated spell at Inter Milan. 

What Roman apparently wants, however is to revive Andre Villas-Boas’ youthful attacking scheme.  Rumours persist that Lampard and Cole haven’t been offered new deals as Abramovich seeks to rid the club of players he sees as implicit in Villas-Boas’ loss of control and eventual demise.

In employing an unpopular henchman with serious questions over his long-term future, Abramovich has played to Russian money stereotype, but has done so with great effect.  Benítez, a hard-nosed, obstinate – and talented – manager is perhaps the best appointment for a thankless task.  Benítez has taken on the role as a goon to shield his boss, and perhaps his replacement, from tarnishing their reputation with the fans.

It could be that Benítez wins the position full-time: there are few other managers as talented and available as he is.  However, his poor popularity level and the impending availability of entropy-generating, serial Benítez-antagonist and former Chelsea boss Jose Mourinho, a successful trial period for Rafa won’t necessarily result in continued employment.  This is again, to type: when did you meet a henchman who wasn’t ultimately disposable?

Some regeneration advice for Chelsea from Doctor Who

Courtesy: bandbent.wordpress.com

“Life depends on change, renewal”.

These were some of the first words spoken by the second Doctor Who, all the way back in 1966. They were needed because the original actor who played the Doctor, William Hartnell, had left the series and moved on to a retirement home for the terminally crotchety; he was replaced by a younger, fitter, happier – at least initially – actor, Patrick Troughton.

The character of The Doctor, from the eponymous series – starting again in only a matter of weeks – has (mostly) enjoyed a fifty year television existence because when Hartnell's illnesses became too great for the program, they simply subbed in another actor and wrote it into the plot. The Doctor's appearance and mannerisms changed markedly, but his innate character of fairness, equality and just being generally good has remained through eleven actors and half a century. The invention of “regeneration” was so simple and elegant that it allowed a successful program to embrace, and therefore survive, radical change.

This same sort of regeneration is currently in process in West London at Chelsea. Over the summer the Blues cornered the market in tricksy, creative types as they acquired starlets Oscar, Marko Marin and the Hazard brothers, Eden and Thorgan. When combined with last season's best buys, Gary Cahill and Juan Mata, the Blues have replaced their cantankerous old stagers with much more watchable stars.

This is a regeneration with leaguewide implications. The Blues still boasts five of the six most important aspects of the successful last decade – their names are Abramovich, Terry, Lampard, Cole and Cech. Only Drogba has departed. The character of this team doesn't so much depends on this quintet but is actually entirely derived from them: they have the strongest personalities and are the best leaders, the rest of the team will follow or be damned.

Because of this, no matter how important Mata or Hazard become, and despite the obvious cosmetic changes, Chelsea's performance in 2012-13 will revolve around its more venerable elements.

Let's harken back to Who for a moment. Acclimatising to a new Doctor usually took a couple of episodes simply because the characterisation varied so greatly between actors; a new boy was finally accepted as The Doctor (capital T, capital D) after claiming the role with a great performance in a strong story. The same applies at Stamford Bridge. The sheds belong unquestionably to Terry because of his “Mr. Chelsea” aura, his past performances and the memories of success. This has a twofold effect – it promotes team pride but it's hard to argue that it also doesn't lend itself to embracing necessary change. The reinvigoration won't be complete until an alpha dog emerges from this new batch.

For the Blues to walk, rather than reel, into the future, the old salts have to lead by example one last time and embrace regeneration not just of the playing squad, but of the team's leadership group.

Chelsea won't change definitively unless one of Eden Hazard, Fernando Torres, Daniel Sturridge or Mata takes over. While his performances last year justify him the title, Mata's personality may be too mild-mannered to wrest control of the team. With Torres' funk stretching back to the Tennant era, this almost automatically leaves the confident Hazard the best candidate.

The regeneration of body has all but taken. Now the same must occur at the head.

Villas-Boas fired for breaking coaching's golden rule

And so Andre Villas-Boas is gone, cast to the recycling pile like a dapper cardboard cut-out in a suit that's slightly too small.

Roman Abramovich may as well have employed a cardboard cut-out, as he almost certainly would have performed better in the job with the highest expectations in England.

It's not that Villas-Boas is a bad manager – that's not even close to the truth. He's an excellent manager who, in this appointment, simply picked the wrong battles to fight. The result is that his head is now deservedly displayed on a spike outside Abramovich's castle alongside those of the myriad managers who've run afoul of Roman.

Villas-Boas' remit was to scratch his Russian patron's itch for beautiful football.

And to focus more on refreshing the squad with youth.

And, most importantly, to win – preferably the Champions' League.

As is the case with 21^st Century management, employing a manager is to employ his style. It's now almost impossible to divorce the man from the method, and therefore Villas-Boas was brought to West London to play the same football with which his Porto sides traipsed through Liga Sagres and the Europa League.

That style of football, however, utilised a high defensive line which didn't suit a backline whose key components could be outrun by the Eastbourne Zimmer-frame Relay team. The Chelsea of 2011-12 wasn't built to thrive in such tactics, and the young boss didn't alter his methods quickly enough to stop the slide (!) into fifth place. In isolation he may have survived such tactical idealism, but when combined with an openly antagonistic relationship with stalwarts Lampard, Anelka and Alex, the thirty-four year old could not be persevered with.

Villas-Boas followed what has now become the management norm: steadfast adherence to one's tactical ideals is favoured over pragmatism. This is slightly disturbing, as it directly opposes the first rule of coaching: play to your team's strengths. This rule can be ignored only when working under an extremely patient overlord – and even then only occasionally. It takes time to adapt a team to a gameplan, especially when those players are as hard-nosed as John Terry; it takes far less time to adapt said gameplan to a set of world-weary multimillionaires.

It would have been almost impossible to resist overtures from noted sweet-talker Abramovich, but it appears now Villas-Boas should have twigged that he wasn't the best fit for the position. In sport, however, common sense often plays second fiddle to self-confidence. All of self-confidence, rationale, common sense and ambition are also easily concealed by the coin on offer.

The next manager to take the star cross'd position will have his own ideas how to play the game. For his sake, and for the heart health of the entire Chelsea fan base, he should realise the key to achievement – and therefore longevity – at Stamford Bridge is ultimate pragmatism.

In defence of Andre Villas-Boas

After overseeing two successive home losses for the first time in the Abramovich era, Chelsea manager Andre Villas-Boas has faced renewed speculation as to his future at Chelsea. Such talk is inevitable - I said, inevitable - thanks to his boss' propensity for firing managers. Expected, sure, and unfair given his short tenure, but is sack-talk even warranted?

Let's examine AVB's remit: to win - or at least compete - for the Premier League and Champions' League titles, replenish an ageing squad, get Fernando Torres firing, all the time playing attractive football. The season is about 100 days old; to expect all of the above to occur by now is quite obviously laughable.

What has the 34-year old done to warrant such attention? Presiding over three losses in four, OK, but the play behind those losses hasn't been horrible. To fire a manager on results rather than overall quality of play, while common, is a last-ditch move; Abramovich must have second, third and fourth-line plans rather than just nuking it all and starting over.

Villas-Boas has been tactically sound, if prone to an ambitiously high defensive line. The Blues assemble in a compact formation usually featuring Torres up front, ostensibly allowing incision from Juan Mata and width players Malouda and Sturridge. In keeping with the reinvigoration part of his mandate, offensive focus isn't on players nearly his own age (Drogba, Anelka and Lampard) but guys entering their prime.

Neither has the manager redefined roles - his men play where and when they perform best. Spectators haven't seen Lampard lying deep before the defence - he isn't suited to it and won't or can't play that position effectively. While spectacularly unsuited to a high defensive line, John Terry isn't being empowered to act as a Libero. So far, with only a few exceptions - and one notable inclusion - guys deserving it have played.

The Blues still score goals - over two per. Torres, while not the blistering El Nino of old, has regained his blonde locks, and with them a semblance of form. Mata looks to be one of the buys of the offseason, while it shouldn't take long to replace Jon Obi Mikel with Raul Meireles (even though it's harsh to blame the Nigerian for Maxi Rodriguez' goal on Sunday). The team is now much less stiff-legged than last year; an athleticism AVB hoped to take advantage of with a new game style.

In short, Chelsea haven't won more because his men have given away poor goals and, at times, failed to take advantage of fruitful situations. Suggested "fixes" for Villas-Boas and the Blues have focused on improving the defence, big-upping Mata and finally choosing between Torres and Drogba. This is only kind of true: the defence certainly needs addressing, but Mata by virtue of skill alone is becoming a featured player. Villas-Boas already has chosen Torres over Drogba - the cards are on the table - but now needs the dressing room's waning alpha-dogs to embrace change.

No-one's calling Terry and Lampard old dogs - well, nearly no-one - but it takes time for players to adapt to another, especially one which prioritises out-and-out speed over muscularity. Villas-Boas will be fine, as will Chelsea. The same can't be said for Didier Drogba and Nicolas Anelka.

Why England can beat Spain

As the Iberians land on English shores, they bring with them a remarkable record. Since February 2007, la Furia Roja has played 71 matches for 62 wins, four draws and five losses; they score an average of 2.25 goals per game. That's an 87% win ratio. For some brief perspective, the all-powerful Barcelona side of 2010-11 won just under 74 percent of their matches.

Spain should have no reason to fear. But they find themselves matched against an opponent of whom they should be extremely mindful.

Why such anglocentric sentiments coming from a critic of both Fabio Capello and the English football hierarchy? It is encouraging for the men in white that the gaffer has called up a (relatively) youthful squad including first-timers Jack Rodwell and Daniel Sturridge. However, Three Lion optimism shouldn't come from any potential debutant but how the match suits England's ageing or faded stars.

The conditions both teams find themselves under generally sees England perform better than any other set. There are a minimum of expectation, a (relatively) understated buildup - for English football - and a self-inflicted crisis surrounding John Terry. Thursday's match should be appealing to partisan and neutrals alike because it gives those England players who have for so long disappointed the chance to perform on a high stage without pressure.

Aside from deserving trio Kyle Walker, Rodwell and Sturridge, Capello's most recent squad features staid, expected names: Lescott, Cole, Terry, Lampard, Rooney. It also includes speedy, tricksy wingers Adam Johnson and Theo Walcott and the (relatively) precise Stewart Downing. In comparing the squad there is a gap in quality between the players in the Spanish squad and those who will represent England but it is hardly a chasm. A larger gap, however, lies in the empowerment of those players and their ability to play as a team.

The psychological benefits of playing as vast underdogs on a big, hopeful stage should be enough to stir a performance out of players who have tempted us with occasional performances only to revert to type in later matches; guys like Frank Lampard, Glen Johnson and Walcott. If they are allowed to play with freedom, this game could be a years-delayed coming out party: (relatively) few have doubted English talent - just the application and heart thereof.

Tactically, wingers Sturridge, Walcott and Johnson could prove decisive as the Red Fury exhibit perhaps their greatest weakness against speed merchants on the flanks. Full backs Puyol, Monreal, Ramos and Alba all have obvious quality but, like most, are vulnerable to pace. Sturridge in particular should be a monty to start as his Stamford Bridge form continues to impress.

Spain v England, 2009: courtesy: myfootballfacts.com

It's in matches like this Thursday's that the Three Lions seem to do well: clashes where excitable expectation gives way to a pessimistic realism. Even though understatement and English football rarely go together, there has been a gathering mood of "blah" about recent Three Lions excursions as weary pundits refuse to be tempted into notable proclamations. This play into the hands of Capello and his men.

Don't be surprised if England defeat Spain on Thursday. They should have all the tools to do so - talent, vocal crowds and the perfect scenario to highlight the talents of underachieving stars. Spain are still favourites - 87.3 percent! - but the match is not the foregone conclusion many suggest.

Notes on leaving the bench

The Mail on Sunday made a big fuss about Frank Lampard leaving the Chelsea bench after being an unused substitute in Chelsea's win over Swansea City at the weekend. All anyone knows - except, perhaps, Frank Lampard - is that with only minutes left in the match, the England midfielder walked down the player's race.

 Chances are that there was nothing in his actions; he thought it best to retreat to the rooms for treatment or something similar. It's been one of the most trying professional times for Lampard as he struggles with possible slips down the pecking order for club and country. A storm in china crockery of course, but if, just if, his actions were a protest at his removal from the Chelsea starting lineup - in which he's been a fixture since moving from West Ham - he's committed a protest of the immature and selfish.

courtesy: dailymail.co.uk

 A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, a former girlfriend of mine who played professional basketball told me how proud she was that she had quit the bench after being subbed in a big loss. I was astounded she'd done so; and asked how she'd react if a teammate had done likewise. She wasn't complimentary to this fictional teammate, only then realising that was how she was now perceived. She was so wrapped up in her own reality that the perceptions of her teammates didn't even register.


That explained a lot, because a lack of understanding about how teammates will react in certain situations indicates of a lack of team chemistry and that the needs of one are put above the needs of many. Sport is littered with similar examples, ranging from the Detroit Pistons' unnecessary player strike (the coach was going to be fired anyway) to citing examples of opponents failing to shake hands. As a player - or manager - your voice is important and, contrary to occasional opinion, heard. It's just not the only voice a coach has to listen to.

Teenagers see the importance of making regular statements - with clothes, music and in many other facets of life. Making statements just be heard, especially leaving the bench to make a protest, is a juvenile act made by people used to getting their own way. I don't believe Frank Lampard is one of those players; here's hoping he returns to the Chelsea side in coming weeks.