Wow. Giving new meaning to the phrase “one and done,” Chelsea have sacked Avram Grant as manager. Mind you, all he did this year was get Chelsea into a cup final, 2d place in the Premiership, and the Champions League final. “Not good enough” says the petulant billionaire who owns the club!
Is there anyone who seriously thinks Chelsea underperformed this year???
Hmm, sort of expected it. Football is pretty unforgiving of managers who can’t stamp their authority on a team. It would take some stamping to get that rabble at Chelsea in order, mind. If you don’t have the respect of the senior pros, though, you’re pretty much done.
Even quietly disposed guys like Arsene Wenger are clearly in charge - Grant never gave that impression. A lot of it is media spin - I recall a few stories along the lines of ‘Grant doesn’t have a clue in training, barely understands the offside rule’ etc. Certainly not true, but the fact that people at Chelsea where planting those stories in the first place speaks poorly of his authority.
Well, they didn’t win anything, so they must have done.
Even though second in the Premier League means qualification for the Champions League next season.
The cynic in me says that he’s been sacked because not winning something has to be some one’s fault, and it can’t be the owner’s for sacking their top-flight manager.
Could it?
Some consolation for Grant, he had a 4 year contract and only completed 8 months. I’m sure he was looked after “properly”. He was never popular and after Mourinho - the special one - I think the media just went after him.
He had to win the Champion’s League to survive, that’s what Abramovich wanted more than anything.
It’s rumoured that he’ll be followed by other coaching staff.
Who knows, perhaps the special one is coming back? The press would love that I imagine.
And the silly thing is, he would have won the Champions’ League if Terry’s boot hadn’t slipped at just the wrong time. So tell me: if the fifth kick goes in, is he somehow a better manager for that? 
We’ll never know…
So who’s going to succeed poor Avram? People here are saying it could be Frank Rijkaard who was just sacked by Barcelona. This would reunite him with assistant Ten Cate, with whom he was in Barça earlier when they won the CL.
I’ve opined elsewhere that Grant was always destined for only a one or at most two year run. The idea is this: no one would want to follow directly after Mourinho at Chelsea; the players where a bunch of whiners who would be impossible to work with (as it turns out, true), and the “legacy” of Mourinho’s success would hang around a new coach like a millstone. So they bring in someone who can only be very glad to have the job, and they intend to dump him after one or two years, and by then, someone really good would be willing to come in.
The funny thing is, in their press conference on the whole thing, the upper management for Chelsea admit that Grant exceeded their expectations for the year! So this poor guy comes in, no one even at the club gives him much of a chance to win anything, and he comes the closest to European silverware of any manager in Chelsea’s history! So they fire him.
In other news, it looks like Sir Alex will call it quits within the next three years. You’d think some other teams would understand from what United have achieved that there is value to stability in an organization. :smack:
DSYoungEsq, you are so right that a manager needs time (to build a squad that understand each other, to get a reputation so players want to come to the club and to establisg a decent youth academy).
But multimillionaires want instant success … and foolishly think they can buy it.
Ain’t it the truth. And that’s why I’m happy that Chelsea lost the CL final.
Hasn´t there been some speculation about “The Great One” staging a comeback? I read somewhere (Swedish sport-site that got it from an English one) that he and Abramovich had been meeting over the last few weeks.
Speculation, yes, but it’s not going to happen. And Guus Hiddink has also said no.
To MU who are owned by another billionaire…
Ok. Like I said - speculation on a Swedish site with rumors from an english one 
But they were a hugely rich and successful club before being purchased by a billionaire, who presumably saw them as a commercial proposition, not something he could pour money into in order to enhance his personal status if they became successful.
Chelsea were taken over by a billionaire who has pumped a load of money into the club. His financial reward is partly limited by the size of the stadium (which is in a valuable part of London and thus almost impossible to expand).
Manchester United (a formerly profitable club as Dead Cat states) were taken over by a wealthy family who used debt leverage (I hope I’ve got that right) to afford the purchase. The club now make payments of millions in interest every year:
A deal is due to be concluded at some point next month which will see charges on loans fall from a massive £90million per year to £62million.
http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/2006/0718/manunited2.html
Just to update (from this morning’s paper):
Abramovich has indeed put over £550 million (about $1,100 million) into Chelsea. But it’s in the form of interest-free loans, so he will get his money back if he sells (or Chelsea make a profit, which they don’t at the moment)
Grant has hired the same lawyer (Julius) who acted for Princess Diana in her divorce (show me the money!)
A Billion dollars??? For WHAT?
No wonder he’s pissed. 