THE NEW YEAR, BUT SAME OLD WHINES!
The talent is obvious but it’s time to iron out f laws, Jose
THE cry rang out on January 1; a warmly familiar sound, like the chimes of Big Ben or the singing of Auld Lang Syne. Jose Mourinho, pouting and paranoid, was cursing the wicked injustices and sinister incompetence of referees. A new year but an old, old whine.
The occasion of the latest protest was Chelsea’s emphatic 5-3 defeat at Tottenham. The target could have been anybody with a whistle, but this time the honour fell to Phil Dowd.
Early in the match, Dowd had declined to award a penalty when the Spurs defender Jan Vertonghen appeared to handle. The decision was patently honest yet probably mistaken. No matter; Mourinho had identified his excuse and, as the Tottenham goals began to overwhelm his inept defenders, the Chelsea manager went through his objectionable routine.
Dramatic poses were struck, mundane decisions were dramatically contested, the fourth official was sneeringly harangued. The provocation was relentless, all of it endorsed by the compliant lackeys on his bench. The entire performance was an exercise in self-indulgence and the interview which followed was a piece of ham-fisted malice.
He was asked: ‘Was the “campaign”, the “conspiracy” against Chelsea, at work again?’ He replied, archly: ‘It’s a question I don’t want to answer.’ Later, still in full, drama-queen mode, he declared: ‘Every moment is unpredictable, but there are things which are becoming predictable.’ ‘Which are?’ inquired the interviewer. ‘Forget it!’ sniffed Mourinho, subtle as a toddler’s tantrum.
Clearly, he had prepared a diatribe over Dowd’s refusal to send off Federico Fazio for a challenge on Eden Hazard. From his position, perhaps 60 yards away, he had been screaming for that red card.
Television evidence then demonstrated that Dowd had spotted Fazio’s contact with the ball, a fact which Hazard himself confirmed.
It wasn’t good enough for Mourinho, who resorted instead to the spurned penalty. ‘Mr Dowd was too slow to go with the ball,’ he said. ‘He was 40 yards away. He made the right decision. The decision which was 10 metres away he couldn’t make.’ He was asked about Gary Cahill, twice kicking at the back of Harry Kane within three or four yards of his dugout. ‘I didn’t see that,’ replied Mourinho.
It is worth regurgitating the details of his latest escapade, if only to illustrate his abiding philosophy. Throughout his first spell at Stamford Bridge, as well as his time in Madrid and Milan, he repeatedly fell foul of authority through his aggressive attitude towards officials. Some believe it is a calculated strategy to persuade his players that the world is in conspiracy against them. Others insist it is simply a self-aggrandising desire to win every argument and pull every stunt in order to finish at the top of the heap.
Of course, he is not the only Premier League manager to scapegoat referees. For some — and tedious grumps like Sam Allardyce and Mark Hughes spring swiftly to mind — blaming the officials has become the default reaction.
Garry Monk at Swansea may be painfully naive but he has swiftly acquired the same dubious habit. And for all his admirable qualities, even Arsene Wenger seems to harbour a semi-permanent grudge.
Others, despite occasional lapses, appear rather more civilised, notably the two Manchester managers, Louis van Gaal and Manuel Pellegrini, Ronald Koeman at Southampton and Sean Dyche at Burnley. Their pressures are no less than the rest, yet their selfdiscipline seems more assured.
Which brings us back to Mourinho. Unlike one or two of his contemporaries, he is not an obtuse man; on the contrary, he plainly possesses an agile, original mind. As his record would attest, he is also remarkably good at his job.
While many of us will always prefer the beautiful teams created by Pep Guardiola or Sir Alex Ferguson, Mourinho’s sides bear the hallmark of diligent coaching and intense efficiency. Yet we sense he wants something else. He wants to be popular as well as successful; not merely among those starry-eyed admirers who can see no further than the glitter of silver, but in a wider circle, one in which style and personal grace are valued as highly as the narrow-eyed accumulation of points. And it is here that Mourinho falls miserably short. As the new year episode demonstrated, he cannot rid himself of the desire to bully and demean those who stand in his way, nor can he reject the temptation to preen and to posture, to constantly demonstrate his undoubted cleverness. Every quarrel must be won, every grievance must be aired. And when things go badly wrong, every excuse, no matter how bogus, must be shamelessly paraded.
He has received an array of blessings, yet crucially he has been denied a sense of self-awareness. In more than two decades of coaching and management, he has enjoyed major achievements, but he has also revealed significant weaknesses. At 51, he still has time to take stock of his situation. We should hope that he uses it wisely.