Revealed: Why Chelsea let Mourinho go

[Aesthetic Relic 301]

Metro

Revealed: Why Chelsea let Mourinho go

Chelsea have finally revealed the reasons why they are searching for their sixth manager of the Roman Abramovich era.

Claudio Ranieri, Avram Grant, and Luiz Felipe Scolari have all been sacked under the Russian owner, while Jose Mourinho left by mutual decision and present interim boss Guus Hiddink will quit at the end of the campaign.

And, for the first time, chairman Bruce Buck has revealed exactly why the club made every single decision.

He said: 'Well I think that every time a coach has left Chelsea or almost every time, people, fans and otherwise have said you shouldn't have let that coach go. I think each situation that we've been involved in since Roman has bought the club, a different set of circumstances have applied in terms of why that coach/manager has left.

'If you start with Ranieri, first of all he wasn't the manager that the current board and current owner had selected, he was in place when we arrived and I think that at the end of the season it was clear to us and really clear to him also that we were going in different directions and it was time for him to leave.'

Mourinho was the next man in charge but, despite delivering two title, left the club in September 2007, to be replaced by Grant.

'We then brought José on, who did a superb job, won us half a dozen trophies, did a great job and the fans loved him but once again in the fall of last year, I think it was clear to José and it was clear with the board that his time with the club was up and it was a mutual decision that he would leave the club and I think it was the right decision for him and the right decision for us,' said Buck.

'Avram [Grant] came in and once again at the end of last season, not because he didn't win the Premier League and not because he didn't win the Champions League but because the board and the owner felt that he wasn't the right manager to take us forward.

Chelsea then turned to former Brazil and Portugal coach Scolari and Buck continued: ' I think that when we hired him last summer the fans, the press said what a wonderful choice particularly with his track record but the name of the game in football is results. As things progressed, particularly after the period of time since we lost to Liverpool at the end of October, our results and our performances were not as the manager wanted, as the players wanted, as the board wanted.

'Over the last several weeks we didn't really see any signs of a turnaround and we felt that we could just languish through the rest of the season but we felt that it was just time for a decisive decision and we took one.'

Hardly ground breaking news.

Its basically what has already been said before.

[Elliott 7]

A load of bollocks from Buck.

Ranieri. Different directions. What does that mean? Do you mean to say that Ranieri didn't want to win things? Just say what you think, you didn't think he was good enough.

Same with Mourinho. Different directions? I can only take that to mean that Mourinho wanted full control and you wouldn't give it to him. I think I prefer Jose's direction.

Grant: Just say it, he never deserved the job in the first place.

Scolari: All good until he said "decisive decision". What is a decision if it isn't decisive

[Fulham Broadway 16,385]

As you say, hardly ground breaking news. Nothing revelatory there at all. Buck is Abramovichs lawyer and was given the chairmans job, and just shows he is a yes man with a hand in the till...

[Drogba11CFC 108]

Hand in the till...that's why his surname's Buck.

[Steve 10,227]

A load of crap from buck

Talking out of his arse really. Raniere was sacked because they did not think he was going to win us trophies so they brought in mourinho who won us 6 but still the club got greedy and wanted more but than when mournho tried to do something about it the club was not there to support him and than you decided to part ways with him which has turned out to be the worst decision you could of made.

[tlax25 0]

I think it is clear that at the start of the 2007 season Jose had lost some interest in being Chelsea's manager. He no longer got excited by big goals, he hardly ever got off the bench anymore. And I think that is because certain players were forced on him and Roman and Buck and the board would not give him complete control over player transfer decisions. So in a sense I think Buck gives us 40% of the truth but doesn't explain why Jose probably felt it was time to leave.

We can only guess what might have been had Jose been given full authority. Maybe some of those draws last year would have been wins and we would have won the league again? Who knows. But certainly buck is not being 100% honest.

[Para6iT 2]

Yea I thought the same things either Buck is not being honest. I dont see any problem in having Jose as the manager, he managed the team very well, better than ever. To be honest if Chelsea still have him for now, we might have not been draw and left 7pts behind mu nor lost/draw to a small club.