Graham Potter ousted for ‘shiny new toy from Germany’ as British media reacts

Editor F365
Graham Potter watches his Chelsea side lost at Tottenham.

Chelsea sacking another Englishman for a German? Silly Chelsea, they were supposed to ignore the sh*tness.

 

This is the Greatest Showdown
The Cambridge Dictionary defines a ‘showdown’ as ‘an important argument that is intended to end a disagreement that has existed for a long time’. Is there anybody outside of The Sun who believes that’s what happened at Chelsea on Sunday?

As the Chelsea statement said after the sacking of Graham Potter: ‘We have the highest degree of respect for Graham as a coach and as a person. He has always conducted himself with professionalism and integrity and we are all disappointed in this outcome.’

All disappointed? Even after a ‘showdown with Chelsea chiefs’?

Sometimes, and this could blow some tabloid minds, people just have a conversation and then shake hands.

 

Germ(an) warfare
Over at the Daily Mail, it is all about nationality. Because at the Daily Mail it is always about nationality.

Here’s Ian Ladyman:

‘So it turns out that new Chelsea is just like old Chelsea. Win or bust. Move forwards or move to the next one.

‘The appointment of Graham Potter was supposed to signal the end of the Roman Abramovich years of hire and fire, both literally and in terms of the club’s philosophical outlook. It was, new owner Todd Boehly assured Potter on hiring him last September, time to build a different and more sustainable football club.

‘But that meant nothing in the end. It meant nothing once a season of reverse travel became inevitable. It meant nothing once a shiny new toy from Germany became available. How inevitable. How dismally short-term and short-sighted.’

This is not about Chelsea, Ian. No big club with ambitions would keep literally the worst manager in their Premier League history. Liverpool sacked Roy Hodgson after exactly the same number of games with a very similar win percentage.

And the ‘shiny new toy from Germany’ line is just contemptible. Chelsea have sacked a failing manager and will replace him with somebody they believe is better suited for the job, whether that be Julian Nagelsmann, Mauricio Pochettino or Brendan Rodgers. That is what happens within football clubs when managers fail. The mistake – as Jamie Carragher wisely said – was in appointing Potter in the first place, not sacking him now.

‘Chelsea should not have to tolerate bad managers, of course, but Potter is not one even if he has been a disappointment in some ways. His results have been worse than anybody ever could have foreseen.’

So Chelsea ‘should not have to tolerate bad managers’ and his results have been awful, and yet it is ‘dismally short-term’ to sack him? This makes no sense. Potter is absolutely not a ‘bad manager’ but he was very clearly a ‘bad manager’ for Chelsea, who have sought to remedy that mistake. Just as Manchester United did with David Moyes. And just as every football club in the world does when results are poor.

‘There are those who say Potter was not cut out for a big club. That he said the wrong things at the wrong time and in the wrong way. Strange how those things get thrown at managers when they lose but not when they win. It’s all rubbish, of course. What matters is what happens on the training pitch and then on match day and the great shame now is that we will never know whether the great change of direction – some real faith in a new way of just being – would have worked at Chelsea over time.’

Potter has not been sacked because he said the ‘wrong things at the wrong time’; nobody would have given a flying f*** if Chelsea had won more football matches. What matters IS what happens on the training pitch and then on match day and THAT was sh*te. No other Big Six club would tolerate results this catastrophic.

‘So the interesting thing for Chelsea and Boehly would have been to give Potter his time through the rest of the season, through a summer and a pre-season and in to the next campaign. In other words, to do what they said they would be. That would have been the brave thing to do.’

Interesting? Yes. Brave? Yes. But also really sodding stupid if they knew that players, fans and the club’s executives had entirely lost faith in Potter.

Weird this but it’s not Chelsea’s responsibility to conduct an ‘interesting’ experiment. Or their responsibility to keep failing British coaches in work.

 

Bambi is dead
The Times’ Henry Winter has long since made his feelings clear on Graham Potter but his words…

‘But a Chelsea manager? They’re a different breed. Potter never sounded like one; whatever outsiders might think, Chelsea fans want a head coach with a bit of their swagger, a bit of José Mourinho’s cockiness. They craved a strong, confident manager with a powerful, consistent vision of how he wanted to play.’

…read a little ridiculous in the context of his utterly ludicrous reaction to the sacking of Frank Lampard.

 

All quiet on the western front
So who next for Chelsea? Well, the value click-wise is in pretending that leading candidate Julian Nagelsmann has already made a decision.

So on we go to the Mirror, who splashed this ‘exclusive’ about Marco Silva on their back page on Monday…

…but then decided that the clicks/money was to be found in fabricating some absolute bumtwaddle about Nagelsmann.

‘Julian Nagelsmann issues Chelsea message after U-turn following Graham Potter sack’

Has Julian Nagelsmann issued a Chelsea message? Has he balls.

Has Julian Nagelsmann issued any message at all? Has he balls.

Has Julian Nagelsmann said or done anything at all in public ‘following Graham Potter sack’? Has he balls.

What has happened is that Sky Germany reporter Florian Plettenberg sent this tweet:

And that, ladies and gentlemen, somehow constitutes a ‘Chelsea message’ from Julian Nagelsmann himself. Because all of the (shiny) Germans are interchangeable of course.

Mediawatch Graham Potter