Tidigare publicerad på Vital Chelsea, http://www.chelsea.vitalfootball.co.uk/article.asp?a=502561

He Is Not A Manager

I do not adhere to the pre-requisite that you have to like or love a manager or other officials of the club of your heart to support and love the club.

Somehow it seems like many posters do and expect the others to do the same. Keep this in mind when reading this article. (And yes, it is a long one).

It is not necessary for me to like Grant to love Chelsea. Chelsea is so much more than Grant, even more than Abramovich. Chelsea is an interchangeable concept, a club that existed for more than a hundred years and has seen many owners, many more managers and a plethora of players pass through. We even changed our club colours once back in history from light blue to royal blue (smart move). We changed the crest too and back again. It changed nothing important. Nor will a new stadium, which is a more important question than a new manager. I love Chelsea as much as anyone and always will, I will not feel the same about some people at the club. Not even all fans.

That said, let us get on. I said when José Mourinho quit that I will not make an easy judgment or analysis of the successor until he had time with the club. We are now one week away from the much talked about 12th week of the Grant-era. A week when it will be decided if he can be the manager of Chelsea, as Grant lacks the certification needed of a manager. In my eyes a ridiculous requirement, but after all it is there and if Chelsea can not obtain an exemption, it will be Grant`s last week as manager.

It does not matter much, as Avram Grant in my eyes is not a manager. He does not work as we are used to managers doing.

Avram Grant works much more as his former title, technical director, as such did work some years ago in Italy. It is basically only at games he works as the ordinary manager. And there lies his greatest weakness. His strength lies in working as a technical director with the overall responsibility but trusting better men to do the work.

His greatest strengths are a surprising humility in allowing others to take over responsibilities and choosing good staff. He has realised that in some areas he is out of his depth. He has not, as most managers, come in with yes-men and his own trained staff. Instead he has chosen people that are good for the club whoever manages it. It is sign of confidence in both himself and how secure he feels at his position in the club.

Of course his very best quality is networking. He is acknowledged as a very shrewd operator in this, which is why he feels so secure in the position he has. And there is no way he would have felt that way if the agenda of how he would take over had not been obvious to him from day one. Only the exact moment when the two main egos Mourinho and Abramovich would clash irreparably was unknown. A battle Mourinho must have known he could not win, so he chose the way out that paid him and all his assistants the most. As the England managers have shown, getting fired is way more profitable than resigning.

Grant early on kept Steve Clarke as he had the player`s trust. A trust Grant had to gain as soon as possible, not for what he was but for the position he took up. A smart move that focused in what his job is, not what he himself is.

After making a fool of himself trying to run the training sessions with techniques and exercises that went out of style 20-30 years ago he made it very clear he wanted another good man as assistant manager. He, or Frank Arnesen, (?) chose a man with an excellent reputation as the second man. Henk ten Cate is in my eyes what made the difference of the great Barcelona team two years ago and a more average today, despite better players. He also stands for another style of football than José Mourinho who was above all about winning and the team. Ten Cate takes a more individual approach to it. And strangely enough a more disciplinarian one as reports about no more laughing and joking in the training sessions prove. Together with Quiroz at Man U Henk ten Cate is the world`s best second man.

The preparation ahead of games is not as extensive and exhausting as it was with Mourinho who gave every player a dvd of his coming opponents. Whether this is good or bad is hard to say, sometimes it seems to take a bit of creativity out of the game with too much preparation and tactics. Tactically it is hard to say who is the man, Henk ten Cate or Grant.

Grant also brought in the best goalkeeper coach I know in, Christophe Lollichon from Rennes. Undoubtedly on recommendations from Petr Cech. It might be a detail but it shows excellent instincts from Grant to bring such a man into the club. It is not like we did not have the best goalkeepers before, now they will be even better.

In a way it is good not to have to live through all the media attention we got from everything José Mourinho said and did. It is much quieter now and the papers are not shredding us up as before. It is also a bit more boring.

But if Avram Grant does not stop talking about us playing more attractive and attacking which we in reality are not doing it yet I will puke. Fans are not idiots. And he has also several times made the biggest error a manager can do if he wants to keep any respect with the pundits and the fans. Do not ever say that we played well, when everyone with more than one functioning eye saw that we were quite awful but managed to win anyway. Lying to the fans and the media in such a way is a horrible habit. It is insulting to fans and our intelligence. (He is not alone in this, but I dislike it as much whether it is him or anyone else). As is boasting about how good you are before you have proven it. (And no, his Israeli credits are in no way enough to sustain his claim).

We have only played very well three times in the Grant era, and then against opposition that was nowhere near their normal standard. They underperformed badly against us. We have not yet won anything.

With a squad like Chelsea just about anyone will win the games we have won. However much we bitch on this site, every player of Chelsea is above average, with only 1-2 exceptions. And for players of that calibre to play substandard it takes a bad manager, and I do not think Grant is that bad. I just do not see anything great in him yet.

About our so called attacking, attractive play since the change of management I think Alan Curbishley of West Ham nailed it down in these comments.

'I don`t see any difference. I think they`re talking about it as if it`s a different game but if you look at them there`s not a lot of change.'

'I think the side was established and they`ve shown that - there`s been no change to personnel.'

'I don`t think their style has changed. They play a certain way it suits them, and all that`s happened over the last couple of months is they`ve got their bigger players back.'

There have been hints of a different more chance taking football, but mere suggestions and occasional times rather than systematic. I think we play more like old time Chelsea, mixing great games with rather dismal ones. The difference is that the players have learned to win even the dismal performances, which is more up to the quality of the squad than tactics. What I miss the most is that feeling that we will finish off the game the last fifteen minutes, whatever occurred before.

The thing that Grant does least good is his coaching during the games. In that particular area I do consider him sub-average. Sometimes I even wonder if he is awake during the games. To me this is more important than maybe to other, but to me this ability to change a game is what determines genius and mediocrity in managers.

His substitutions are just about every time too late or too predictable. (Thought I think he subbed SWP in time versus West Ham). He has not in tactics nor in substitution showed inspiration or flair. There has not been even a hint of any ability to change a game once it has started. He rarely seems to listen to his assistants during the games, but then I can only judge that from tv-broadcasts so I might not be sure of that.

That Grant got the job due to his networking capabilities I don`t think even our alonrose (who believes Grant is the second coming of David) denies. That made me fear him as a yes-man. In that he has impressed me of not being, though I do have the feeling that the pressure from above is "slightly" less than it was on Mourinho. The one most disappointed in that must be Shevchenko who probably was the only one to cheer José`s departure. Sheva got many, many more chances with Mourinho than he has under Grant.

Can we win things with Avram Grant as manager? Definitely, though I myself doubt he has the capability to get the team to take the Premiership title. That is the toughest one to win after all and takes the most of a manager`s skills. Winning the league takes a somewhat different skill set than winning cups.

Cups is another thing and a totally other ballgame so to speak. I can with no problem what so ever see us win cups with Grant as manager, even the Champion`s League. It is down the draw and the ability to get the team into peak performances and that is the task of the entire management, not the least the ones in charge of the daily sessions. I just wish he will improve his game coaching a lot.

As stated first I will never like Grant, but it is not necessary for me to accept him as the manager. I will not describe abilities to him that he has not, just as I never saw José as the perfect man. But no man in Chelsea has ever given us the pride in ourself as José did and I think he is maybe the best manager in the world, and even Chelsea will miss such a man. That (and six titles in mere three years) is his legacy to us and I feel ashamed of the cheap shots many, and I`m sad to say Grant, takes at him (the latest when talking about JM as England manager). Maybe it is the natural way for someone to try to establish himself, but it gives a bad aftertaste.

After all Avram Grant has so far only managed the team 13 games and might not even be allowed to call himself manager next week. As some have stated, it is only when we see how and whom he brings into the team as his men, we really can evaluate his efforts in Chelsea. Maybe time will prove me wrong, I doubt it, but I would sure welcome it if he brings us the Premiership this year.

I think we are a strong contender for Champion`s League even if we do not take the Premiership. After all, it seems easier to win the CL if you are not in contention for the title. Not liking a person does not exclude giving credit when it is warranted; I just refuse to give credit until certain things have been accomplished - not for the odd, fluke games.

Finally, in ways I am not all that concerned today who is the manager. The staff around the manager are top class and so is the squad and that is way more important to me than if we have a charismatic and proven excellent manager or a man with the charisma of a fig and no merits.

I am much more concerned about the rumours that Chelsea will be buying Ronaldinho and waste another fortune on a player that lost interest in his football Chelsea is still a great team with many great players. The important thing is to keep it that way, with players that still burn for trophies, the fans and the blue shirt - even if they are handsomely paid to do it. We will see who Grant (or is it Arnesen) will bring in soon enough. Does the emperor have new clothes or? (ref. HC Andersen).

Just my thoughts from the armchair.