HAS GUUS JUST LOST HIS TOUCH?

Career’s stalled since Bridge exit

HOWEVER successful Guus Hiddink proved during his last stint at Stamford Bridge, there are aspects of his departure from his most recent job that some at Chelsea might find rather alarming.

Much like Jose Mourinho there were accusations of betrayal, with Hiddink suggesting only a few weeks ago that his second spell as the manager of Holland was undermined by a ‘traitor’ in the camp.

This, though, was not a player but a member of the national federation staff who Hiddink had long considered an ally. The 69-year-old privately confirmed this to a confidant after giving an explosive television interview.

Hiddink’s relationship with Holland’s players is said to have remained healthy even if he has to be held largely responsible for his country’s failure to qualify for the European Championship finals in France next summer. It will be the first tournament the Dutch have missed since 2002 and the first European tournament from which they will be absent since 1984.

Players do seem to warm to a coach with a more even-tempered, less combustible approach than Mourinho. Chelsea’s were so enamoured with their Dutch interim boss that John Terry presented him with a Rolex watch before the 2009 FA Cup final victory that marked the conclusion to a brief but impressive tenure.

Since then, however, Hiddink’s career has taken something of a nosedive. After guiding Russia to the semi-finals of Euro 2008, he was unable to lead them to the 2010 World Cup following a play-off defeat by Slovenia. That setback came just five months after he left Chelsea, Hiddink parting company with the Russians in February 2010.

With the Russian federation then funded by Roman Abramovich, Hiddink had earned a fortune in Moscow — reportedly more than £6million a year after tax. When he landed another well-paid position with the Turkish national side in August 2010, his salary was criticised because he chose not to base himself in the country. It did not go well, a play-off defeat by Croatia costing Turkey a place at Euro 2012.

Short of options, Hiddink accepted an opportunity to return to Russia in February 2012 as manager at Anzhi Makhachkala where he lasted 18 months, having at one stage announced his retirement only to then change his mind.

A second spell with Holland was far more appealing, with the Dutch FA announcing before the 2014 World Cup that Hiddink would succeed Louis van Gaal after the tournament.

If Brazil proved successful for Van Gaal and his team, it did not meet with the approval of Hiddink.

He did not like Van Gaal’s more defensive approach, certainly not the 5-3-2 formation that amounted to a departure from the traditional Dutch style.

Hiddink made clear his intention to revert to his favoured 4-3-3 formation, ignoring the view that it could unsettle a team that had just progressed to a World Cup semi-final.

‘We did try to tell him,’ one senior Dutch football source said yesterday. ‘But Guus was determined to take the team back to the way he felt all Dutch sides should play.’

He started with a friendly against Italy and within 10 minutes his side were two goals and a man down, with Bruno Martins Indi sent off. Already under pressure, Hiddink bowed to the calls to switch back to 5-3-2 for a European Championship qualifier against the Czech Republic in Prague five days later, but his side went a goal behind after 22 minutes. He responded by returning to 4-3-3 and the Dutch equalised, only to concede in stoppage time.

A win at home to Kazakhstan followed but when his offensive 4-3-3 approach resulted in a defeat in Iceland, Hiddink’s critics focused as much on the apathy of Holland’s display as the tactical uncertainty. Even his supporters noted a lack of spirit to match a lack of cohesion.

Then there was a 4-3 friendly defeat at home by the USA in June this year and, despite a win in Latvia which followed, Hiddink was on his way.

LEICESTER offered him a quick route back into football but Hiddink was too bruised even to consider it. By October, however, he was ready, privately telling friends that he rejected an opportunity at Marseille because he was aware the disharmony at Chelsea could soon present him with a chance to reunite with Abramovich.

In Holland his return to west London will be met with scepticism. Johan Cruyff was among Hiddink’s harshest critics while Ronald de Boer declared him finished as a coach. ‘He is done,’ he said, having described Hiddink’s tactical approach as ‘old-fashioned’.

Others still recognise Hiddink’s achievements. One of his allies said yesterday: ‘He is still a great coach and he is fit again. He had a major hip operation before returning to the Holland job and he really struggled with it. But in an interview last month he looked healthy and was aggressive, full of confidence. For Chelsea that is a good sign.’