Poll: vote for the new Chelsea manager | Debate: were Chelsea right to sack Scolari? | Matt Dickinson: Ghostbuster wanted for London address | Simon Barnes: Chelsea's quick-fix culture | Scolari sacked after meeting Abramovich | Who's next for poisoned chalice? | Divided dressing-room led to difficulties in the boardroom | Joys from Brazil fail to materialise | Giles Smith: Mourinho back at Chelsea? We can but dream | Chelsea's timeline to disaster

A trainer of the third rank was lucky enough to book Lester Piggott for a fancied ride, but alas the horse didn't win. “That's it, Piggott. You'll never ride for me again.” “Ah well,” Piggott sighed. “I suppose I'll have to pack it in, then.”

By the same token, if a World Cup-winning coach isn't good enough for you, where the hell are you going to go for the next one? Chelsea have reached the limit of human possibility in their quest for the right man. The logical next step is to hire an archangel. But a few months down the line and it'll be, "Out you go, Gabriel. What do you know about routing the forces of the ungodly? You've lost the dressing-room, you've mislaid the owner, your press conferences are crap and, besides, we're not the most successful club in the world and that proves you're rubbish."

So Chelsea fired Luiz Felipe Scolari. You may be good enough for Brazil, but if you think you're good enough for Chelsea, you've got another think coming. You come here with your fancy talk about winning the World Cup, but what about the Carling Cup, eh? How many times have you won that?

Chelsea keen on Mancini and Rijkaard

Frank Rijkaard and Roberto Mancini lead race to replace Luiz Felipe Scolari, but Guus Hiddink and Jose Mourinho also in frame

• Divided dressing-room led to difficulties in the boardroom

• Luiz Felipe Scolari sacked as Chelsea manager after meeting with Roman Abramovich

• Roman Abramovich braced for another hefty payout

Ghost of Mourinho haunts Stamford Bridge

The ghost of the Special One needs to be banished after the sacking of Luiz Felipe Scolari as Chelsea manager

• Who's next for the Dirty Harry sacking club? Feel lucky? Well do ya, punk?

• Jose Mourinho back at Chelsea? We can but dream

• Special brew missing as joys from Brazil fail to materialise

Who's next for poisoned chalice at the Bridge?

Gabriele Marcotti looks at the contenders from across Europe who could bring Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich what he craves

• From Jose Mourinho's removal to Luiz Felipe Scolari's sacking: Chelsea's timeline to disaster

• Luiz Felipe Scolari under fire as alarm bells ring out for Chelsea

• Sir Alex Ferguson writes off Chelsea's title chances

Multimedia

• Did Scolari deserve the sack?

• Betting: Hiddink favourite to replace Scolari

Related Links

• Victory viewed as birthright for English

• Beast in Man United is beauty to Ferguson

• Who's next for poisoned chalice at the Bridge?

So let us pause for a moment. Chelsea sacked Scolari because they thought there's something wrong with him. But all the evidence points the other way. Scolari is a good manager. Could it be - could it actually be, perchance - that there is something wrong with Chelsea?

What was Scolari doing before he joined Chelsea? He was doing great stuff with Portugal, getting a small country to punch above its weight. What were Chelsea doing? Getting rid of managers. Getting rid of good managers: Claudio Ranieri, José Mourinho, Avram Grant.

No doubt they got rid of Scolari because he has been around too long. At Portsmouth, they have just got rid of Tony Adams because he hasn't been around long enough. It appears that some clubs appoint managers for the simple pleasure of sacking them.

Is it really necessary, this hair-trigger sack response? Does it actually make for better football, better results, better clubs? Certainly, a sacking can be therapeutic in the short term. Overnight, every player is busting a gut to impress and the whole club is uplifted with the routine thrill of the relaunch.

So what should you do when the manager of a big club can finish only eleventh in the league? Say you stick by him and a couple of seasons later you're eleventh again. And then things get even worse, a run of six defeats and two draws in eight games. That's it! We've been patient long enough! Had Manchester United done that, they'd have sacked Sir Alex Ferguson.

Think long term. Aim for stability. Devolve power to the manager. Back him. Stick with him through the rough patches. How extraordinary that five of the top six clubs in the Premier League follow this policy; how bizarre that it's the one that doesn't that's in crisis.

You wonder whether all football is mad and whether the Dirty Harry method of dealing with temporary difficulties is actually necessary. Is it really true that in football, different rules apply? Is this really a world in which common sense has no meaning? Or is that just a story put about by losers?

Instability, nervous excitement, seat-of-the-pants stuff, going from one result to the next, finding heaven and hell in every league table - well, all football is a bit like that. That's kind of the point.

But it pays to look a bit beyond the weekly routine of elation and despair. That's the way of smart supporters, smart owners and smart managers. They look for bigger patterns, for enduring trends, for lasting value.

When a man presents you to his fifth wife, you don't wonder what was wrong with the previous four; you wonder what's wrong with the bloke. And when a football club get rid of four top managers in half a dozen seasons - well, you don't wonder what's wrong with the managers, do you?

Truly, Roman Abramovich and Chelsea have become the Violet Elizabeth Bott of football. “Give me what I want! Give me the best and most exciting and most successful club in the history of the world and give it to me NOW - and if you don't I'll thcweam and thcweam till I'm thick. And I can!”