Football: Avram's unreciprocated love
Chelsea’s man of the moment, Michael Ballack, is also their man of the media. The German midfielder, partly because of his nature, his confidence, and also because of his ability, is by far the most articulate and honest member of the squad. He says it the way he sees it and can be refreshingly honest.
In a football world of anodyne comments and – let’s be honest – lies - Ballack is different...
He recently gave an interview to the German magazine, Der Spiegel,
ahead of the first-leg of the Champions League semi-final against
Liverpool which was run, as often happens with European publications,
as a Q&A. Here’s an extract about life at Stamford Bridge:
SPIEGEL: Is it true that players refer to Avram Grant, your Israeli manager at Chelsea, as ‘Average Grant?’
Ballack: I've read that.
SPIEGEL: Grant was an unknown quantity when he replaced José
Mourinho, and he's considered a protégé of the club's owner, Roman
Abramovich. Is this noticeable?
Ballack: If that were true, he would have had to let centre-forward
Andrei Shevchenko play, because he's considered Abramovich's buy. But
he doesn't do that.
SPIEGEL: Is the team successful in spite of its manager?
Ballack: Is that possible? The team certainly has enough class.
What’s to be made of that? Two of the three answers are, at best,
ambiguous although what Ballack says about Shevchenko is pretty direct.
And true. To be fair to Abramovich he doesn’t expect the striker to
play. He would like him to. His main beef with Mourinho wasn’t that he
didn’t play Shevchenko, but that he clearly didn’t show him any
respect, either. Grant has done that and Abramovich is honest enough to
accept that he doesn’t warrant a place in the team.
Yet Ballack isn’t rushing to Grant’s defence. The manager loves him
but that love isn’t being reciprocated. Ballack has “read” that the
players have a dismissive nickname for Grant – but doesn’t refute it.
He’s asked if a team can succeed even if the manager is weak, and
doesn’t knock that down either.
The comments, therefore, fuel the belief that Chelsea’s squad is
succeeding in spite of rather than because of the manager. In what has
turned into a remarkable season which could end in an astonishing
double that alluded Mourinho, maybe the club has stumbled on the right
formula – a light hand on the tiller to guide a strong-willed group of
big name players. But if that’s the case then it’s a temporary thing
and those close to Abramovich are still of the mind-set that, whatever
is achieved this season, can they really trust Grant with the club’s
future? The answer remains ‘no’ to that. At present, anyway. It may
change but I sense it won’t. And no-one I’ve spoken to has changed
their minds either.
It sets up tonight’s second leg at Stamford Bridge especially as, in Rafa Benitez, there is a manager more akin to Mourinho, than Grant. An obsessive. A controller. It may just be that Grant’s approach will succeed, it certainly should this evening, but it appears a temporary thing. Chelsea can get away with it for one campaign but next season they would be wise to switch to a stronger leader. And they know that.
A light hand? Are you kidding? The best words to describe Chelsea now are: Renegade Team. They were out of control on Saturday...but won. Grant should not take credit for this. The team is being run by the players; a strong group of players mind. Which doesn't bother me so much as HOW those players are playing. Chelsea's players are bullying their way to victory and the referees don't see the infractions. I'm a neutral and am pulling for Rafa's dull red machine today. And then I'd like to see the classy United win in Moscow...
Posted by: Beautifulgamer | 30 April 2008 at 03:38 PM
Positively agreed!!!
With the quality of such a squad, I doubt if Grant has antyhing to do with the recent victories of the team. I have never been a fan of "boring" Mourinho, but I sympathize on how the way he was ousted, and I believe someone had stabbed his back in order to steal his job...., and frankly, calling Grant Average has over-praised him laregely already
Anyway, Man U is the only team to watch, simply because they are the best
Posted by: Sam Choi | 30 April 2008 at 09:28 PM
Certainly Avram is not in the same class as Mourinho. With Mourinho Chelsea will have been in a EPL leadership by now. All dues are to the players and fans. The players have showed tremendous commitment and willpower to win not for Avram but for Mourinho.mohd fadzel nor
Posted by: mohd fadzel nor | 30 April 2008 at 11:19 PM
Certainly Avram is not in the same class as Mourinho. With Mourinho Chelsea will have been in a EPL leadership by now. All dues are to the players and fans. The players have showed tremendous commitment and willpower to win not for Avram but for Mourinho.
Posted by: mohd fadzel nor | 30 April 2008 at 11:20 PM
So if Chelsea wins, it is thanks to its players. If it looses, it is because of Grant.
I just can't believe you are serious. A coach job is to make his team win. Let's wait for the end of the season before, becasue I have never seen Chelsea played so well.
Posted by: zoomy | 01 May 2008 at 12:00 AM
Lets be frank about this. Avram has not changed the style of play. Chelsea were as boring as before. All this until they turn in a few good performances in the last 2 games.
Grant deserves credit - they are = top of the premiership and in the final of the euro cup. The performance tonight was as convincing as Man Utd's last night and arguably they were more entertaining than M Utd.
Anyway, the fact remains that results speak for themselves and Chelsea are doing well. To call Grant inept is naive. He could not have possibly done any better than he has. I urge all you arm chair critics to truthfully consider if Grant had anything to do with the last victories and their position in both of the world's biggest competitions?? The answer is clear - he did. He picked the team, chose the tactics, and manged the team. Give the guy a break...
Posted by: Tommy TheNose | 01 May 2008 at 12:34 AM
One should only read the comments on this article to realize how stupid and hypocrite is mankind. When Chelsea lose its Avram's fault, and only his. When they win then its because of the players and has nothing to do with their manager. I urge you all to take one course (or more) in logic, merely to find out that you're lack of it.
Somehow I have the feeling that, one day, you'll ask JOSE WHO!?
Posted by: David | 01 May 2008 at 03:23 AM
One should only read the comments on this article to realize how stupid and hypocrite is mankind. When Chelsea lose its Avram's fault, and only his. When they win then its because of the players and has nothing to do with their manager. I urge you all to take one course (or more) in logic, merely to find out that you're lack of it.
Somehow I have the feeling that, one day, you'll ask JOSE WHO!?
Posted by: David | 01 May 2008 at 03:28 AM
The most telling indication that Chelsea players are winning in spite of Grant is how they celebrated the victory. They never included Grant in the celebrations. It doesn't get any clearer than that.
Posted by: Paul | 01 May 2008 at 04:35 AM
Avram Grand might look bleak and has no charisma. He is not "one of the guys" with the players like the guy before. But look at the results! Never before Chealsea got to such results. Avram Grant has been with Chelsea since September. We are 8 months from September and he has nothing to do with the success of Chelsea. Good looks and charisma are not a prerequisite to success!!!
Posted by: Ofer | 01 May 2008 at 06:05 AM
Avram Grand might look bleak and has no charisma. He is not "one of the guys" with the players like the guy before. But look at the results! Never before Chealsea got to such results. Avram Grant has been with Chelsea since September. We are 8 months from September and he has nothing to do with the success of Chelsea?? Good looks and charisma are not a prerequisite to success!!!
Posted by: Ofer | 01 May 2008 at 06:07 AM
Paul - the reason Avram didnt celebrate with the players after yesterday's semi final win is because he had a flight to catch to Auschwitz-Birkenau (you know - the Nazi death camp) as it is the holocaust rememberance day and he was asked to give a speech.
but dont let the facts ruin your theory.. oh and remind me - Jose WHO??
Posted by: Raulito | 01 May 2008 at 11:17 AM
People at Stamford Bridge should understand the difference between business and football. Of course Football busniess is a different business that requires specialist knowledge and skills. You may have your money but this is not a football skill. The way things are happening is very worrying for the fans and the club.
The owner needs to understand this, be humble and bring Jose Mourinho back at Stamford Bridge. That will make a real good to the club. What makes Man United so sucessfull is the stability of the manager. They have to learn that at Chelsea. You cannot just buy a club and want immediately the manager to win the world cup. You need to be patient and work toward achieveing that goal.
If that cannot be learned, then the only solution is to bring Jesus Christ at Stamford Bridge to make miracles.
Posted by: Anderson | 25 May 2008 at 01:29 PM
michael ballack you are the best
Posted by: albina | 29 May 2009 at 07:59 PM