 |
| Maurizio Sarri and assistant Gianfranco Zola |
I was reading a recent interview with former Chelsea manager Maurizio Sarri ahead of his move to Lazio in the Serie A, and among other things such as his endorsement for Jorginho to be a contender for the Ballon D'Or, and his continued praises for N'Golo Kante and former blue Eden Hazard, he also speaks about how he regrets leaving Chelsea for Juve so soon, calling a personal 'mistake', and that the players we have now compared to the ones we had a few years ago (when he was manager) would be better suited to his system.
To be honest, at first I found this surprising. Sarri's tenure as Blues boss wasn't exactly comfortable, he had to deal with anger and flat out racism from a small fraction of Chelsea fans, we suffered some heavy losses over the year including the 6-0 defeat to Man City, and of course there was the famous Kepa incident which involved Sarri storming off in anger. But when asked which season he preferred; his Europa League winning season at Chelsea (where he picked up the first trophy of his managerial career), or his title winning season at Juventus, he doesn't mention the Italian club at all, and emphasizes that his year at Chelsea was 'special' as well as his last few months in charge of Napoli.
And it got me thinking - imagine if we kept Sarri on board. Sure, the fans were horrible in their treatment of the Italian, and it might have been a reason that he was so persistent in a move back to Italy, but he was building something at Chelsea. And our motto with managers at the moment seems to be, if you're not performing well, you're out. I've also seen people with negative reactions to the interview - struggling to accept that Sarri seems to miss his time in England, as well as disagree with anyone who thinks he performed better than his successor, Frank Lampard.
But I think people seem to forget just how well of a job he did in a year, in his first season in England. He left the club with a win percentage of 63.49%, which compared to other managers is a strong statistic. We reached the finals of both the Europa League and League Cup, winning the Europa League without losing a single game, and only losing on penalties in the League Cup final. We reached third place and re-secured Champions League final, even though we went through some tough patches and some heavy defeats. And plus, Sarri only made 4 signings in that year, 1 of which had already been finalized before his arrival. I'm sure he had several ideas on how to improve upon his system, but sadly he wasn't given that opportunity. He was also trapped in an era where we made some poor transfers and were perhaps reluctant to provide managers with the players they wanted.
Sarri was, and still is, a capable and smart coach, and sets up his teams to play attractive football. We saw it in Napoli, where he revolutionized his 'Sarri-ball' tactics, leading to beautiful passing football that was a joy to watch, gaining praise from many, and ultimately making Chelsea interested in the Italian. Though Sarri himself did feel that his year at Juve was an unlucky time, as they celebrated a fourth place finish under Pirlo, while not celebrating a title win under Sarri, with everyone apparently "having dinner on their own".
(There's a really good explanation of Sarri's tactics here)
I had the idea Lampard might struggle the day he took the Chelsea job - in fact I wasn't entirely convinced he was the correct managerial signing for us to make, and with no insult towards him whatsoever, 1 years experience at Derby isn't exactly comforting when you're going up against some of the best managers in the world with years of experience in the Premier League. Thankfully he proved me wrong.
But, without beating around the bush, Lampard was an inexperienced manager. With only a year of experience down in the Championship, as well as limited transfers, he was bound to run into issues. And I must admit, Lampard wasn't top of my list of Sarri replacements. I always dreamed of seeing a former Chelsea player take up the managerial role, but I want them to be ready and prepared before they do it. It's the same thing with Lampard. He was doing great things with Derby, he got them to a playoff final in spectacular fashion, and with how Derby are performing as of recently, it feels like they could have done with a few more years with him as manager.
Though, I can commend him for lots of things, and he by no means had an easy task with the departure of Eden Hazard and the looming transfer ban, but undoubtedly his greatest feat was his expert implementation of the youth players into the first team, and getting them to perform well as if they had been in the team for years. Players like Abraham, Tomori and Mount were stand out stars in Lampard's first season and although a few may not make their way into Tuchel's system anymore, Lampard with the help of assistant Jody Morris has most certainly brought these players close into the public eye.
 |
| Abraham was Lampard's top scorer in his first season as manager |
Lampard maintained our Champions League status with a 4th place finish, as well as an FA Cup Final, and he did it all with a young and fresh team that surprised some big names in the league. I felt that we had finally gotten a manager that knew the club and was close to the fans, and it seemed my biggest fear of Lampard not being able to compete in the Premier League as a manager had been mostly crushed. Though it wasn't exactly smooth sailing the whole year.
With Lampard it didn't feel like the odd loss in between streaks of wins and draws. We seemed to go through periods mid way through the season where we would struggle to pick up any points at all, looking sluggish and without ideas. A criticism I had with Lampard was that he never seemed to hold any answers when a team figured out his strategies. Just play the same system, make the same subs, and hope for the best. It meant that players got demotivated. Though I can't really blame him, as with only a year of management, Lampard most likely didn't have his unique style fully carved out, and instead just stuck with what had worked previously with Derby.
Furthermore the jump from Championship to Premier League football meant that teams would be more adept at breaking down Lampard's Chelsea side, and the quality of manager we have in the league currently, the likes of Guardiola, Klopp, Rodgers, and Bielsa, will quickly figure out how to effectively dominate games against Lampard's side. And although Lampard did pick up a few wins against the Big 6 in his first season, it was clear to see that Chelsea struggled against the top teams in the first part of Lampard's second season, with Chelsea's big losses coming against Liverpool, Arsenal, Manchester City and Leicester City before Lampard was replaced by Tuchel.
It seemed we were so desperate to see a Chelsea legend take charge as Head Coach, me included, and the 18 months with him at the helm were joyous. But, some fan reactions to his sacking felt like a toddler kicking and screaming when their favourite toy got taken away. And it was because they couldn't split the distinction between Lampard as a player and Lampard as a manager. As a player he achieved so much for us, won countless trophies, and stands as our current top goalscorer. At Chelsea as a manager he couldn't replicate those successes for several reasons, but that does not tarnish his playing career in any way. Furthermore him being sacked after only a year and a half does not ruin his reputation, and the door is always open for him to return as a Chelsea manager again.
Sacking Lampard midway through the season was also surprising, and it would have been nice to see if Lampard could shake the poor results and return to his good form, but as I mentioned before, Chelsea are quick to intervene whenever poor performances stack up. In truth, with the team we had, we needed to turn up against the top teams or else we would have continued to sink into mid table. Tuchel had a tricky task being brought in mid-season, but with his skill did a remarkable job, moving us back up to 4th and winning us a Champions League, building on the group stage success that Lampard achieved.
I feel Frank was given the role far too early; he knew how big of an oppurtunity it was for him but at the same time he didn't want to disappoint. Similarly to Andrea Pirlo at Juventus, who took the helm at Juve with only 9 days of management under his belt with the Juventus U23s, and almost didn't qualify for the Champions League. Lampard was thrown into the role and expected to perform, and while he did as much as he could, the system he was implementing just didn't translate onto our team.
At present, Thomas Tuchel is doing a tremendous job at Chelsea, and when he eventually moves on, I would welcome both Lampard and Sarri back, for different reasons. Maurizio Sarri would be blessed with an improved Chelsea team, providing we keep hold of our young talent and continue to make smart signings in the transfer market. Frank Lampard would be a welcome return to Chelsea, and I'm looking forward to watching him improve wherever he ends up next. Furthermore, comparisons between the two are completely idiotic. I feel as if Sarri's year at Chelsea is somewhat overshadowed just because Lampard, who is held in such high regard by Chelsea fans, took the job after him. It isn't wrong to give Sarri more affection than Frank Lampard, and vice versa. Both had their equal shares of good and bad moments for the club, but that doesn't mean to say either is a 'bad' manager at all. And as I said before, both managers, if given the opportunity at a different time, could have achieved so much more, and they both performed equally well in the time they were at Stamford Bridge.