Simon Barnes, Chief Sports Writer
The man, the films, those blondes. Free DVD collection starting this Sunday
"I think he [Arsène Wenger] is one of these people who is a voyeur. He likes to watch other people. There are some guys who, when they are at home, have a big telescope to see what happens in other families. He speaks, speaks, speaks about Chelsea"
Mourinho October 2005
Come with me to any lower-division match. You’ll probably get a half-decent football game. You’re a journalist, you write down significant information in your notebook. The home team make lots of chances but convert only one, then get caught on the break. The match ends, but your intrepid information-gathering does not.
You go to a room, generally bare and unloved, and wait. Eventually – always long enough to keep you in your place – the managers come in, one by one. “How did it go, Ron?” “Well, we made lots of chances. But in this league, you get punished if you don’t take them and that’s what happened today.”

And you and your half-dozen colleagues write all this down as if the words were coming from a burning bush. “Were the substitutions tactical, Ron?” “Fresh legs up front.”
Then one of the long, ugly pauses that characterise encounters of this kind, before someone asks: “Any knocks, Ron?”
The experience of watching a football match is not valid until the manager has spoken. Many, if not most newspapers will be deeply unhappy about a match report unless there is a “quote” from the manager. “We’ve got to work hard in training all week. There are no easy solutions in football.” And we write this all down as if it were Analects of Confucius. Is it not surprising that managers get their heads turned?
José Mourinho represents the ultimate triumph of this: The Cult of the Manager. He has done as much as is humanly possible to render the action on the pitch irrelevant. With Chelsea, the story was always the manager. Players, what do they matter? Like Alfred Hitchcock’s actors, they are cattle.
Mourinho was football’s star. His entire career was a sweet revenge on the gods that made him unable to play the game. But he was never interested in football for itself; rather, it was football as a vector for power that enthralled him. That was his strength and ultimately his downfall.
Because the truth of the matter is that, ultimately, football is a game about spontaneity; about fragments of individual brilliance allied to a corporate resolve. If you reduce football to a series of set-plays, you reduce the capacity for surprise and, therefore, the potential for winning.
But Mourinho hated spontaneity. He sought control. He wanted people who only ever crossed on the pedestrian crossing, not realising, or rather, not understanding that a city without jaywalkers is a city without artists.
He didn’t want artists. He didn’t trust them. He liked ordinary talents developed to extraordinary lengths: Terry, Lampard, Makelele, Drogba. These were people he could control, these were players who would not get between the manager and his public.
One club, one star. Le club, c’est moi. Football’s traditional belief is that the team are an extension of the manager’s nature. Why, you may ask, were Chelsea not flamboyant, feisty, cocky, maverick, paradoxical, intermittently brilliant? Because Mourinho is primarily interested in power. The maverick side of his nature is merely the way he set about claiming power, for it is power, not perversity, that defines him.
As a result, the team were in subjection to the manager. This wasn’t a team who cut loose, ever; this wasn’t a team you watched for the sake of this player or that player. You wouldn’t catch Mourinho signing Cristiano Ronaldo or Cesc Fàbregas, talents that need a certain amount of slack in the rope.
Rather, Mourinho put his faith in method and control. Chelsea were effective enough but never reached beyond the brilliantly ordinary. The truly exceptional was always beyond their reach, perhaps beyond Mourinho’s understanding.
How else to explain his failures with Andriy Shevchenko and Michael Ballack? To fail with one might be regarded as a misfortune; to fail with two looks like a personality disorder. A manager who takes on two of the finest players in Europe and gets scarcely anything from either – indeed, seems to delight in their misfortunes – must ask questions not about the players but about himself.
These two players were stars and, as such, they didn’t fit into Mourinho’s plans. They were a threat to him. It was important for him that they failed, and they did. This is heresy: it should be the belief of every coach that anyone of sufficient talent can be accommodated.
Mourinho preferred other methods. They work, too. They worked for Mourinho at FC Porto, where he won the European Cup, and they worked well enough in England to bring two league titles, even if a second European Cup was always beyond him with Chelsea.
But these methods have their drawbacks. The first is that if you rule the exceptional out of your game, you are going to have problems when you encounter the exceptional among your opponents. You have eliminated the element of individual inspiration. In fact, the only place in which individual inspiration was allowed to flourish with Chelsea was with the goalkeeper. Petr Cech’s head injury was the single reason Chelsea failed to win the league title last season.
The other drawback is that your team are going to be less fun. Less fun to watch, less fun to play for. And you can argue all you like that a win is a win and that it doesn’t matter whether you went the pretty way or the ugly way, the fact is that Mourinho found himself in trouble at Chelsea because of a disagreement on the subject of aesthetics. It is true, yet it is not true, that Roman Abramovich, the Chelsea owner, parted company with Mourinho because he was unable and unwilling to deliver football like Barcelona. That was the proximate cause, of course, an ever-growing dissatisfaction with the fact that Chelsea’s highest ambition was to achieve a sustained and brilliant mediocrity.
But the ultimate cause was different. If it hadn’t been aesthetics, it would have been something else. Mourinho established a one-star club, with one man attracting all the attention, making all the stories, setting the agenda, one man as the centre of power, one man as the moving spirit, one man eclipsing all others. It really should have occurred to him that a man who had spent 500 million quid to establish the club as a publicity vehicle for himself may get a little bit irritated by that.
Because the truth is that Mourinho’s power was only ever an illusion. He drew attention to himself, he had the nation’s football press delighting in every pose, every absurdity, every contradiction, but he was never truly in charge of Chelsea. Such power as he had was loaned, not achieved or given.
Mourinho reminds me of the critic in Anthony Powell, whose goal “was to establish finally that the Critic, not the Author, was paramount”. The cult of the manager is designed to promote the idea that the manager, not the player, is paramount and Mourinho’s is the ultimate expression of this cult. And that’s why Mourinho had to go – because the cult is based on a false premise. In the end, the players are the stars.
Jobs for the boy
Where will José Mourinho turn after leaving Chelsea? Bill Edgar examines some of the possibilities, with William Hill supplying the odds on his next job.
Portugal Mourinho has often said that he would like to coach his country’s national team, although he may prefer to seek further glory at club level after departing from Chelsea ahead of schedule. Odds 1-2
Tottenham Hotspur A club with such a long history of underachievement would surely welcome Mourinho with open arms, but would he be willing to join a club where a director of football has a prominent role? Odds 6-1
Barcelona A move to the Nou Camp would be a surprise, even though Mourinho worked there as Bobby Robson’s translator. The Portuguese is disliked for his inflammatory comments before and after Chelsea’s Champions League meetings with the Spanish club, notably in 2005, when he accused Anders Frisk, the referee, of bias towards Barcelona because of an alleged half-time discussion with Frank Rijkaard, their coach. Odds 8-1
Real Madrid A job at the Bernabéu also seems unlikely given that Real recently did exactly what Chelsea have done – parted company with a successful manager because his style was boring. Fabio Capello’s league title last season could not save his job. Odds 10-1
England Mourinho has the ego and single-mindedness to take on “the impossible job” and the post will probably become available this autumn if England fail to reach the European Championship finals. Odds 10-1
FC Porto Having won every trophy on offer to the club, he would probably decline the chance to coach there again, even if he would have the freedom to operate as a dictator. Odds 12-1
Inter Milan Mourinho reportedly spoke to the Italian club this year, but Roberto Mancini should be secure as coach after Inter’s runaway title success last season. Odds 20-1
Arsenal Mourinho may be tempted to seek revenge on Chelsea by taking over one of their main rivals, but the prospects of Arsène Wenger vacating the manager’s chair seem slim. Odds 20-1

Simon Barnes is the multi-award-winning chief sportswriter at The Times. He also writes a Saturday column on wildlife. His 15 books include three novels and the best-selling How To Be A Bad Birdwatcher. His latest, The Meaning of Sport, was published last autumn. He lives in Suffolk with his family and five horses
Read the training tips and advice that helped our London Triathletes
Times Online's new TV show helps you make the right decisions for your pet
Read our exclusive 100 Years of Fleming and Bond interactive timeline, packed with original Times articles and reviews
The latest travel news plus the best hotels and gadgets for business travellers
Shortcuts to help you find sections and articles

Find tickets for:

Get three teams for £6 £100K prize fund to be won

Will your team win their match this weekend?

Make sure you don’t miss a goal with our text alerts

Find a course, arrange a game and save money
2007
£47,700
2007
£41,899
2008
£41,445
Great car insurance deals online
£25,510 – 32,000
Transport for London
London
£50k
NHS
Nationwide
£
£90,000 + PRP
Essex County Council
Essex
100K
Confidential
London
5% below developer pre-launch price!
Luxury Appts, beautiful gardens w/ Thames views
Great Investment, River Views
By Funway – Thailand
from £589pp
Christmas Cruises
From only £995pp
APTs East Coast now from only
£2425pp.
Great travel insurance deals online
Contact our advertising team for advertising and sponsorship in Times Online, The Times and The Sunday Times. Globrix Property Search - find property for sale and rent in the UK. Visit our classified services and find jobs, used cars, property or holidays. Use our dating service, read our births, marriages and deaths announcements, or place your advertisement.
Copyright 2008 Times Newspapers Ltd.
This service is provided on Times Newspapers' standard Terms and Conditions. Please read our Privacy Policy.To inquire about a licence to reproduce material from Times Online, The Times or The Sunday Times, click here.This website is published by a member of the News International Group. News International Limited, 1 Virginia St, London E98 1XY, is the holding company for the News International group and is registered in England No 81701. VAT number GB 243 8054 69.
Deco was awesome under Mourinho at Porto. And don't forget that he wanted Gerrard badly. Also, Arjen Robben was individually brilliant, as was Joe Cole from time to time. And Drogba scored some crackers and flourished under Jose to become one of the top forwards in Europe. The players that failed were unwanted anyway and actually very over-rated. Hang on a minute.. everything you've said is (unusually) complete tosh...
chris, worthing, england
Neither harsch nor distorted, Dan. In fact it is rather this constant glorification coming from fans which is in fact distorted.
Read trough the press-net and although there are other commentaries pointing in the same direction this piece here is by far the finest and most accurate diagnosis I have read so far.
Control may be one thing, but then any professional needs control over what he is doing. Football temas nowadays are entertainment and if you take a close look at Ferguson, Wenger and even Benitez - they leave the largest chunk of limelight to their teams and that is why the entertain: with football, not with ll that ego-ballyhoo around it.
It will be highly interesting to see, which of Chelsea's hailed world-class footballer have enough real qualities to bring back hthe joy of the game to Chelsea.
Ilja, Sliema, Malta
Dan , who won the tiltle last season? Was it United? You'll find it was Wenger that broke Uniteds dominance. Without him at Arsenal its conceivable that United would have won 12+ premierships by now.
If Jose was such a great manager he would have been able to coax the best out of Sheva and Ballack wouldnt he?
Plus didnt Jose have the biggest transfer fund in PL history? Plus didnt he inherit a team from Ranier that had reached the CL semis and finished runner up in the PL? Plus arent all his best players ones bought in by the previous regime? Terry,Lampard,Robben,Cech? How many unknown gems ala Wenger did this managerial great unearth and develop?
Lets not get carried away. Mourinho was allowed to look like a very good mangaer because he had everything at his disposal.
To take Porto to the top in Europe outstrips anything achieved at Chelsea because imho Ranieri would have led Chelsea to the PL title. He is the man that seemed to have an eye for a player.
Nick Sutcliffe, Thrapston,
Although I am not a Chelsea fan, I am sorry to see Jose Mourinho go. He's certainly the most successful manager Chelsea has ever had. I just wish we could have him as the England manager before someone else snaps him up.
Brian Murray, Preston, Lancs
He is done with the Premiership. This article is an amazingly accurate pshycological analysis of the Man. We will probably coach a club in Turkey.
The beautiful game will be beautiful again. Good riddance.
rabs, paris, france
Well, if just Abramovich would have let Mourinho get on with the job rather than meddling in his affairs Jose would still be there and Chelsea would have been even more succesful than they have been.
Now it is all in tatters - morale is bound to be minimal, the new manager is above his head and soon players will be exiting in droves.
Abramovich's messed up badly but he probably doesn't realise it himself just yet.
Thomas, Copenhagen, Denmark
There is one job open in the Premier League that would demonstrate whether he is a manager worth his salt or not. A club with a fantastic tradition that has no stars and no money. With his Chelsea pay-off he doesn't even need a salary, so that should be no bar. Brian Clough, a man who really could make bricks without straw, took two small clubs to the top and won two European Cups. Can Mourhino do the same?
The club I'm referring to is Bolton Wanderes.
Terry Hamblin, Bournemouth, UK
Not sure that Mr. Barnes has hit the nail on the head with this one. Maybe Mourinho did take the limelight, but I think this was more of a way of protecting players and ensuring focus on the goals set at the beginning of the season.
You say he ultimately failed, but that is too harsh. He really did nothing but succeeded - winning everything except the Champions League, but as we know that is a Cup competition and when you reach the last 4 anything can happen. The only failure was not to play highly entertaining football, but the method he employed for Chelsea was obviously correct - correct because it delivered results quickly which is exactly what Chelsea's chiefs demanded. There was no time for 2nd best, look at Ranieri.
A great manager looks at what he has, what is required and how best to achieve it and I think he did that with the Premiership. Hopefully we'll see a different style when he picks up his new team, appropriate to that league and the resource available to him
A T, Sydney, Australia
Great article. Even though manager's job is important, it is players who deliver. If players believe they are stars (in good sense of this word), they are. If they are constantly told they are second-sort eggs... I believe Roman saved the club by getting rid of Jose. What else may better testify of Roman's long term commitment to CFC?
KKI, Bucharest,
Good piece by Simon Barnes. I believe, too, that it was Mourinho's own frustration at failing to get the power and recognition he craved that ate away at him and ultimately led to his departure. For what is power without recognition from the real power, which is Roman Abramovich?
Keith, Ottawa, Canada
Good article as always from Simon Barnes.
Reminded me of a bar room conversation involving some journalists on a daily paper, with the theatre critic asking the football writer why he always included the manager's and a player's comments: "I don't go round to the stage door and ask Sir Ian McKellen how he thought the performance had gone - why should you ask his footballing equivalent?"
Good point, which wasn't answered. Why don't editors and sports editors ask it too? Then we might get rid of the cult of the manager and back to proper football analysis by the guys who matter - the fans.
Matt Vallance, Ayrshire,
Successful clubs have one man in charge of football policy. Therefore Mourinho was right to want this at Chelsea. Abramovich now looks highly incompetent as a football club owner.
Oliver Chettle, Bedford,
I really enjoyed this thoughtful article which for me had the ring of truth about it. I think that it explains a lot not only about Chelsea but about football in general.
Paul Underwood, Ruislip, Middlesex
I think heâs right in lots of ways but while every fan would love to see their team âplay football like Barcelonaâ, thatâs not something even Abramovichâs fortune is capable of delivering on cue. Nor does that sort of improvised brilliance typically deliver the Championâs League â the one thing missing from the Stamford Bridge trophy cabinet. Man U have played a great brand of football under AF for more than 20 years and only won the European Cup once â in injury time at that. Arsenal has been the most beautiful team in English football history and theyâve never won it. You win CL by playing pragmatic football â like AC Milan, like Chelsea (three CL semis in four years) and like Liverpool prior to this year. Abramovich needs to decide whether he wants beautiful football or consistent European glory. You canât have both. And Avram Grant is capable of delivering neither.
Frank Disclosure, Sydney, Australia
"Petr Cechâs head injury was the single reason Chelsea failed to win the league title last season. "
I would like to pick up on this. As much as enjoyed the piece, I was surprised by Mr. Barnes's decision to attribute Chelsea's dismal time last season to the absence of Cech. I thought that his replacement Hilario was quite efficient in the role even though he appeared somewhat nervous in the first couple of games. Chelsea lost thetitle because Terry was absent for a long time, because they were modest in the Christamas period when they let Manchester United ahead of them, because Jose Mourinho failed to settle a first string throughout the season. Another reason was Manchester United's spirit guided by a certain Cristiano Ronaldo's splendor.
Subhankar Mondal, Bangalore, India
"He didnât want artists. He didnât trust them. He liked ordinary talents developed to extraordinary lengths." Similarities with Brian Clough I think, which lead me to suspect that Mourinho might well be tempted to join a "smaller" club and mould it to his personality.
P Johnson, Hampshire, UK
"It really should have occurred to him that a man who had spent 500 million quid to establish the club as a publicity vehicle for himself ..."
Only to the extent I think of trying to ensure no action was taken against him by Putin. He gave himself a higher profile by taking over Chelsea. Otherwise Abramovich has done next to nothing to publicise himself giving virtually no interviews. In fact the only reason we knew he was there was because the cameras were turned on him from time to time and because of his bust-ups with Mourinho.
He bought the club saying he wanted Chelsea to become the next Real Madrid. I don't think he was simply talking about honours but the quality of football they played. As long as Chelsea were winning things Mourinho was tolerated, as soon as the failed to win one of the two biggests trophies his card was marked.
luke neave, london, England
Some cattle on £100, 000 per week. Is playing two games per week(180 minutes of work) the equivalent of hard-labour, freezing and starving in the Gulag? Entertainment, you must be joking, most people go to football matches to shout foul abuse at each other.
joel joseph, Oxford, England.
Simon Barnes, you've got it completely wrong. That is not what I think - thanks goodness. An opinion, well crafted, eloquently written and different to mine - just what I want to read in a newspaper.
Lindsay , London,
Great piece of writing
Sly, London,
rather harsh and distorted version of reality. Ferguson or Wenger are as much control freaks and actuallly have more power in their respective clubs. While taking all the attention on himself Mourinho has let the players bask in relative calm. For this they are actually grateful to him.
Sheva and Ballack are also big egos and no managers want to deal with that. Witness Ferguson on Beckham after he got married and involved in pop, fashion etc. Managers want players that will die for the cause not prima donnas and show offs.
Winners are often difficult, driven characters. Gullit for one, was also criticised for his outspokeness, but if things are ever to change someone has to speak up. Mourinho has shaken English football into life. It is more competative and of a higher standard accross all clubs than it was before him. He has broken the dominance of Man U. and opened up the chances of other teams winning, and we should be thankful for his willingness to call it like it is.
Dan , london, uk
Would love to have him at Man Utd...
Now that Carlos is leaving Man U, he should step in and take them to greater heights :)
Praveen, Chennai,
How about Man utd?
Fergie is on a rolling contract and now would seem an opportune time to hand over the reins.
Bill, town, country
Spot on! All other articles on his departure now rendered irrelevant.
Peter, Wellington, NZ
Your comments on the desire for control can be laid equally at Abramovitch's door. Talking cliches, football is a business and he who pays the piper calls the tune, but having to write down the clap trap from the manager's cliche handbook each week I would have thought the sports hacks loved the breath of fresh air that the plucky Portuguee brought to the club room at the Riverside in Middlesbrough on a cold Sunday in January. Abramovitch and Mourinho are in their ways similar. Both Chauncey Gardners who got lucky. One with how dumb Boris Yeltsin was and how gullible Siberian peasants were to be duped out of their shares and the other with the luck of Porto going all the way. Neither have the right stuff to own or manage but the money helps. Abramovitch has just acted like a thug with his loot and sacked his piper. Mourinho will be found out when he fails to live up to his special status and just gets on with it, hoping for a win like the rest. Plus ca change.
Paolo, Hong Kong,
I dont care where Mourinho goes, as long as he stays away from Arsenal. I really would not like him coaching my team. I'm afraid he would screw up the wonderful team that Wenger has put together. I think that Portugal would be a good fit for Mourinho.
William Griebel, waterloo, Illinois, USA