Let’s get the obvious out of the way first.
This is a controversial subject of which I know many feel strongly about. However, the aim behind writing this is to encourage people to think beyond the superficial and ask questions of their opinions. It is not in any way, shape or form intended to patronise.
The Director of Football role is something of a curiosity in England. Commonplace across Europe, it hasn’t quite become part of the culture on these shores, and it’s there where the problem begins.
Much of our football is deeply rooted in the past. Whether that’s a good thing or a bad thing is up to you, but it means certain there are some prevalent views as a result due in part to the average age of the football supporter and the football writer.
The manager is supposed to be autonomous, seeing all and knowing even more. Some of the great characters of the game have been bullish, confident, controlling sorts who became iconic for their achievements.
It also acts as something of an extension from the alpha-male world football once was. For years, decades even, a drinking culture persisted throughout the English game based heavily on male pride. That’s without getting into the hard-nosed game (particularly) of the 1970s where Ron Harris, Norman Hunter and contemporaries were revered for their ‘no-nonsense’ approach.
With this mentality in place, the manager is therefore expected to be in full control of ‘his’ club, for a man who doesn’t command the authority of all around him should have no place running a football team, right?
It’s here where the problems really begin. Because your typical non-player has had a career playing the game, ‘outsiders’ are looked upon suspiciously. After all, you can’t tell others to play the game if you haven’t yourself.
Consider Arrigo Sacchi’s famous quote however. A man with no discernible playing career, the Italian is one of the most successful coaches of all time. When doubts were raised as to his suitability to manage Italy’s biggest clubs, he was quick to point out that to be a jockey; one doesn’t have had to have previously been a horse.
The most prominent Directors of Football come from a range of backgrounds; from successful footballers Uli Hoeness, Txiki Beguiristain and Frank Arnesen through to the likes of Damien Comolli and Pantaleo Corvino, who didn’t kick a ball in anger.
Yet you only have to look at how the much-decorated Arnesen was received at Chelsea to realise it’s about more than just whether they played the game.
The English (largely tabloid, but not exclusively) media help perpetuate the myth that Directors of Football cause instability; that at the first sign of problems on the pitch, there must be friction behind the scenes. The DoF is the obvious target for their ire, for they have little to no idea of what the job entails.
Instead of educating themselves on the intricacies of the role and how it has worked successfully in tens, if not hundreds of cases worldwide across many sports, they choose the easy way out and criticise.
Supporters then have an easy scapegoat with which to direct their frustrations, and the vicious cycle of misunderstanding is complete. Look at the fates of Arnesen, Comolli at Tottenham, Gianluca Nani, David Pleat, Avram Grant and others in our domestic game.
Fans are quick to dismiss the media when they don’t like what’s being said, but are equally as swift to lap up opinion which backs up a pre-conceived notion. It’s a tad hypocritical to slate a journalist one minute and then cite him/her when supporting a point of view.
Michael Emenalo is set to be thrust into the same company, with rumours of his promotion to the role this week. The Nigerian remains a vastly unpopular figure at Stamford Bridge, but the foundation for the dislike appears to be unfounded, or at the very least misplaced.
After something of a nomadic career, the Nigerian international has taken in roles on both sides of the Atlantic and at different levels. Few of these have been notable to the casual follower, and, naturally, suspicion arises as to whether he is ‘qualified’ to work at one of the biggest clubs in the world.
This is where things become somewhat ironic, however. Andre Villas-Boas has just been welcomed with open arms despite being of similar ilk to his colleague. With no playing career, the Portuguese has accrued experience and qualifications at a tender age and, after just one season in charge of a club people have heard of, he takes the hot seat in London.
“Ah, but he worked with Jose Mourinho and learned from Bobby Robson, he comes from good stock” is the retort. Perhaps, but one suspects that had Chelsea hired Borussia Dortmund’s Jurgen Klopp (a 44 year-old with an unremarkable playing history), for example, there would have been similar optimism about the future.
Guus Hiddink is believed to be the long-term target for the role of Director of Football, but he has exactly the same amount of experience in the post as Emenalo does. What makes him more qualified for it? His managerial career, of course.
We’ve also heard claims that Villas-Boas will be ‘hands-on’ and ‘his own man’ because of an erroneous report that Chelsea announced him as ‘manager’ instead of ‘first team coach’.
They did exactly the same with Carlo Ancelotti, and furthermore, Villas-Boas has no issue working with others:
‘I have no problem working with a director of football or technical director. The main thing is not to put somebody there to disrupt the manager, the main thing for us is to build on the future and put competent people in the right places and that’s what we are trying to do. We trust a lot the competences that are in and around this club, because we have a successful past of six years that shows us we are on the right track.’
Draw your own conclusions.
There are very few people who are privy to what goes on behind the tall bushes and trees at Cobham. You can speculate until the day is done, and you can comment on body language on the bench during matches, but at the end of the day, it’s churlish to claim that Emenalo ‘does nothing’ and is merely a device for Roman Abramovich to keep a close eye on things.
Nobody cared about him when he was operating solely as an opposition scout in a season where the club won the title in record-breaking fashion, and even fewer noted that when he was promoted to working with the first team squad upon Ray Wilkins’ absence, the team looked less prepared to deal with their opponents.
Was this as a consequence of Emenalo’s diminished involvement with opposition scouting? Was it because he was marginalised by Carlo Ancelotti? The answers to those questions will be guesswork at best, but they’re questions at least worth considering before going off half-cocked because the man doesn’t fit in with English football stereotypes.
We don’t have a clue as to how he’ll get on in the role, and there’s no denying that he could be a complete flop. The problem right now is that people are prejudiced against him simply based on reputation. That’s not fair.
A final note to consider is that even if he has the job title, Chelsea operate with a ‘Football Board’, which comprises the manager, the DoF, Bruce Buck, Eugene Tenenbaum, Ron Gourlay, David Barnard (club secretary) and Mike Forde (Head Technical Scout).
Decisions are taken on a consensus basis, and whilst some many hold greater sway than others, it’s incorrect to say that Emenalo/Arnesen/A.N.Other are ‘running Chelsea Football Club’.
It may not be traditional fare in England, and it may not be popular, but it’s a firmly established way of running an organisation worldwide and, for now, it’s here to stay at Stamford Bridge.
Think about things, that’s all I’m asking.
No related articles.
Follow us on Twitter
Follow us on Facebook
Absolutely brilliant article. Well done.
A good, thought provoking article. I’m actually pretty laid-back about Emenalo’s appointment as Sporting Director (or DoF or whatever) but that’s only because it clearly won’t be the same role that Arnesen had and also because I’m relieved that ME has been removed from the coaching set-up (for which he was, by virtually any measure, underqualified). My biggest problem with him is that he’s a Roman-aligned apparatchik just like Avram Grant was and he’s seemingly immune to failure in a way that Clement, English, Driscoll, Wilkins, De Michelis and Ancelotti etc obviously weren’t. But, who knows? He may be an absolutely fantastic football administrator and maybe that’s exactly what the Director of Football role needs most.
An excellent article – is train of thought following on from a discussion yesterday?
I think you have touched upon the very fulcrum of the issue. People like Emenalo are viewed with suspicion mainly because we don’t know much about them. They’re not perceived as being “ours” – if, for instance, Dennis Wise had been named as DoF – I’ve no doubt he would have received a much warmer welcome. AVB has been welcomed due to his success at the club and previous, albeit much lower-profile, connection.
Emenalo is the fans’ current choice of scapegoat, as Avram Grant was before him, and Henk ten Cate briefly prior to that. I don’t know the guy, and on that basis I’m not going to make judgements about him.
Finally “There are very few people who are privy to what goes on behind the tall bushes and trees at Cobham” – McGarry reckons he is (I don’t know if you’ve seen his tweet this morning). He’s such a bull merchant that I have stopped following him.
Enjoyed reading this. Have asked a couple of contacts in USA about him and a general view is that he did the jobs allocated to him pretty well. Seen as knowing the game across the world well, yet (even more important now) he knew African football very well. Evidently has good contacts in central African countries where the game is huge: that could be very good for Chelsea.
However if he is still seen as an acolyte of Abramovich then he may be torn between loyalties to overall leadership on club, and the football aspect. Anyway, let’s see what he does – if anything – then judge him. Not that anything Chelsea fans ‘judge’ appears to have much impact on the hierarchy, does it?
This has needed saying for a long time, well done for putting it so clearly and impartially.
I for one was suspicious when Emenalo was promoted, mainly because I knew so little about his career. However, I have no problem putting up with his appointment in whatever capacity because I trust the skills, stature and integrity of Abramovich and those he has in place to decide these appoitnments.
If Emenalo is Roman’s stooge, his human cctv, it’s a pretty dire effort at undercover surveillance on the owner’s part. I’d have to say if that were the case I’d be criticising Roman for incompetence, lack of imagination and limited ambition. There are many allegations levelled at our owner, but I dont think you could level those three against him and keep a straight face.
No, Michael Emenalo has been low profile in a misunderstood role, as you rightly say, but low profile does not mean low talent.
Ask anyone at Chelsea – if you haven’t got the talent and the nous, you dont make it, and you are soon out.
Time will tell.
Nice article Juni, I fully support it.
Except…
AVB has won multiple trophies in a respected league in addition to winning a European trophy with an unfancied team.
The logic in not ignorantly writing off Emanalo without full knowledge of his capabilities is valid but it is not valid to compare Emanalo to AVB based on ‘greenness factor’.
How could you place villas boas and emenalo in t same league. beg yor pardon, but i did read somewhere else about emenalo’s coaching methodolgoies when in charge of a girls’ soccer team in the US. Villas boas on the other hand was in charge of a league team in the highest portuguese division. plus villas boas has supposedly gone through the coaching badges, or watever you call em. i am not being biased against emenalo. but honestly having been the asst for CA for 5/6 months what the hell has he done???
A well thought out article which is balanced and respectful of all parties. If only more football writing were similarly constructed. Good Work !
“Nobody cared about him when he was operating solely as an opposition scout in a season where the club won the title in record-breaking fashion”
Not true. Questions were asked even then. And Ancelotti had his own (Italian) scout in the technical staff; it wasn’t Emenalo who was doing the scouting–a role he held under Avram only. There was outrage then and there is outrage now for one simple reason: his thin cv and lack of experience in the elite strata of European football. He had no technical role and none of the relevant experience before he was plucked from obscurity by Avram Grant.
Comparing Klopp (Bundesliga champions) and Villas-Boas (treble winner) to Emenalo (girls team coach?) is preposterous. Just to state the proposition is to know that it is wrong.
Overall, a poorly-researched article that is factually and logically unsound, as well as unsure of the argument it is trying to make. Saying “we don’t know what’s going on behind the scenes therefore misgivings about Emenalo are misplaced” is a classic appeal to ignorance.
Smashing article, well written.
Harry – “having been the asst for CA for 5/6 months what the hell has he done???”
I think the clue here is that he’s a member of the backroom team. One of the guys behind the scenes. Could you name CA’s back-up team, even only a month or so after departure, apart from Paul Clement?
Having known about Villas-Boas’ incredibly in-depth opposition scouting for a while whilst he was with us, I was more recently interested to see Emenalo’s weekly opposition scouting reports on ChelseaTV. I thought I would learn something about the opponents’ tactics, teams etc. However whenever he would talk about what the next team we were playing would do, it was the most banal staff I’ve ever heard. “Arsenal like to keep the ball and pass around, so we need to close them down quickly.” Wow, no shit Sherlock. Granted, why would he give away his in-depth analysis on TV, but some of the stuff he was coming up with was so basic it was unbelievable for our apparent opposition scout. More damningly though, one of the biggest, clearest examples of his lack of ability was his assertion that Inter would come to Stamford Bridge and defend. Hmm, we all know how that turned out. There wasn’t even a plan for if they decided to attack, and I remember reading Emenalo saying as much. Soon after that, his weekly reports were phased off of ChelseaTV, and I wouldn’t be surprised if Ancelotti never listened to him again. How he may now be promoted to DoF is beyond me.
well balanced view, good article.
Tbh I don’t think this article takes us anywhere much that we couldn’t have guessed. I don’t think anyone will change their mind, at least.
On one factual point I don’t think any CFC coach\manager (apart from when Grant took over the side) has ever been on the football board. Mourinho wasn’t, Scolari wasn’t, Hiddink wasn’t, Wilkins wasn’t and Carlo wasn’t. Until someone says for sure I don’t imagine Boas will be either, but then, we don’t have a DoF at this precise moment.
It’s the DoF who would canvas the Manager’s view and account for it in his view within the board, along with other aspects of the technical staff (medical, fitness, analysis, academy & their resources). I think it’s preferable for a DoF to have a football perspective so he can evaluate the significance of their requirements properly, but that depends on the quality of the Director too.
Without a DoF, the board will have to consult with the manager themselves – good for the manager, maybe not so good for the club.
It should also be noted that without a DoF, all other members of the board are lawyers, marketing bods, administrators or analysts. There’s no footballing competence there at all. As such it would seem pretty essential for the DoF to have some practical competence to properly evaluate the technical staff’s requirements.
Emenalo may not have been the greatst player, but he played international football and in a World Cup & also has a business degree. On the infamous occasion when he coached 12-year-old girls, it was a kids academy which was kids by definition. He was only there to help out his wife. While he was there he re-programmed the entire academy ahead of the coaches who were already there and they were impressed with his work & knew they were lucky to have him.
Now whether that’s enough to qualify him to be CFC’s DoF I don’t know, but he survived the cull after Avram, after Scolari & now after Carlo. I make the assumption that Roman doesn’t suffer fools, especially when he’s prepared to sack a World Cup winning manager, a CL & double winning manager etc.
Even if that isn’t enough, I don’t think it unreasonable that Roman has a figure he trusts involved. He has Tenenbaum on both the Executive & Football board to ensure his money isn’t being wasted (why else is he there?). If he’s going to spend the best part of a billion on a club, having someone he trusts present who can spot any abuses is a remarkably small price to pay.
If Villas-Boas has to be scared of anyone it’s Di Matteo, who’s come in as a Uefa Pro qualified coach, while Zola is on the outside having just completed those same qualifications himself. It will be from there that his biggest threats will come, in my opinion.
Hopefully it doesn’t come to that. I don’t want the NEXT manager to be the right guy. I only want the CURRENT manager to be the right guy, with the right support & the best advice available, because that will make Chelsea successful.
We all want that.
You really elaborated some point there I which Mumu, Emenalo’s spy cam and valid point should read your post.
Very brilliant unbiased article, ive been very indifferent to emenalo, i think hes just a target for abuse. The fact is, no one knows what he does, or how capable he is at his job. As for “emenalos spy watch”, all I can do is shake my head.
Juni you are brilliant and this article is well written. I would say this to all haters ‘do not write anything stupid’