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.

Cricket lookalikes: Matthew Wade

Matthew Wade is a lot of things.  Aside from being Australian keeper-elect, he boasts several different looks.  Here, we can see him batting well for Australia, while in this pic he is batting well above his average.  In yet more photos he's the d*** at the pub trying to impress chicks. 

However, when viewing the red carpet photos from last night's Allan Border medal he became the topic for our second cricket lookalike.  Not only does he look like Jamiroquai's Jay Kay but ...

Photo of Andres Villas-Boas courtesy: http://www.zimbio.com/pictures/
Photo of Matthew Wade courtesy: http://m.bushrangers.com.au/team/matthew-wade

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.