Jose's previous success is irrelevant when you have a season as bad as we've had with no improvements in any way on pitch from week to week.

 

In five full seasons at Chelsea he won 3 league titles. I would say that is very relevant when we've come nowhere close to that level of consistency of success in the league after the first time we sacked him. 

 

What was it one league title win in 8 years after he left and one it would have been one in three had he stayed with an overall success rate of a league title every two years. 

It's not like we were slipping out of the top four when he got the sack. It seemed like a real possibility that we could be relegated this season, so as much I hated to see it happen, I think it had to be done.

 

And to be fair, I think Guus deserves a few more matches before we make any judgement on his time here this season.

 

My personal opinion is when you're short term replacement you get judge on short term results. 

 

You're appointed for an immediate injection of improvement in results. 

 

So far I'm still thinking we were short sighted to sack Mourinho. 

jose had lost it, same as he always does

In five full seasons at Chelsea he won 3 league titles. I would say that is very relevant when we've come nowhere close to that level of consistency of success in the league after the first time we sacked him. 

 

The stats would be relevant if we were near the top four or even in the top half of the league table, but the start of the season was our worst during the Premier League era.

He was poor today, and that was the poorest we have been since he came in. The immediate bubble of hope you get after changing managers has been popped and we will see if we just go back to how we were before him or not soon. Everton, Arsenal and Watford could put us right back in the relegation mix if we get them wrong.

Can't still people believe results got Jose the sack. When a manager hints there are traitors in his team, suggests the team his average and it was his effort that achieved success in the previous season (despite a gross spend of ~291m in his three seasons), he was clearly asking for it and he got it with a very healthy severance pay. He isn't the 1st to have a poor title defence, city went through similar without all the circus. Same he did 1st time out when he accused Roman of 'not giving him eggs to make an omelet'

Let's not forget we're comparing Jose with players who can't be arsed vs Guus with players putting effort in. 

Of course Jose is the better manager by far, but he couldn't get the players going this season so Guus wins by default.

My personal opinion is when you're short term replacement you get judge on short term results. 

 

You're appointed for an immediate injection of improvement in results. 

 

When the team is in such a bad shape as it was when Jose was sacked, it's not fair to assume that everything will magically get better after he was sacked. There's not a manager in the world that can turn a relegation fodder team into solid top class team overnight. Guus needs to steady the ship, get the confidence and performance levels back up.

In five full seasons at Chelsea he won 3 league titles. I would say that is very relevant when we've come nowhere close to that level of consistency of success in the league after the first time we sacked him. 

 

What was it one league title win in 8 years after he left and one it would have been one in three had he stayed with an overall success rate of a league title every two years. 

 

I didn't want Jose to get sacked but I believe it's probably the right call, look how bad we've been this season (and the back end of last) with no improvement in sight. I think parting company is the right decision not because of any personal feelings for him just because it seems clear to me his management style and demands of the club and players are unsustainable.

I would also say that after two and a half years of picking and choosing what players he wants and having free reign to sell those he wasn't keen on that i believe he hasn't left the squad in a very good position (given our clubs advantages), certainly not as good as when he arrived. Maybe the club didn't trust him to "rebuild" the squad after the amount of time and money spent getting it to where it is now only for it to be not good enough less than a year after winning the league.

Edited January 13, 201610 yr by jack h

I was gutted to see Jose go but it was inevitable.The results were bad but there was obviously more to it than that.We will always be gratefull to him for all the success.Now Guus has come in we should move on.He hasnt got an easy job and my expectations this season are not highbut football is all swings and roundabouts.....UP THE CHELS!

Uber Chelsea FC ?@UberCheIseaFC  31m

31 minutes ago

Huddink: "Pulis did a great job of playing the role of the referee by taking off Yacob. The referee forgot to do it." Brilliant.

For me it just feels like he's opened a deck chair at Cobham and said "Just do what you usually do lads" he hasn't done anything different at all, just seems to be here for the pay cheque. I know it's early days but he hasn't put any sort of stamp on the team at all, a few of the players have improved but I think that's more to do with Jose's ousting than anything Hiddink has done.

Uber Chelsea FC ?@UberCheIseaFC  31m

31 minutes ago

Huddink: "Pulis did a great job of playing the role of the referee by taking off Yacob. The referee forgot to do it." Brilliant.

Fair play that is funny and less likely to get him an FA fine than what Jose would have said.

Realistically, people can't expect him to implement a bunch of changes just for the sake of it. He's here to fill in the gap, get the players to find their form again. He's not going to fix all the problems in a few weeks.

We have improved despite the draws, today was the ref, against Watford we missed the crucial pen, United a smash and grab from the Matic chance was possible.

Under Jose a lot of games we lost/drew I just sat back in defeat, there was no arguing the result.

Also Guus is making a lot more effective and logical subs unlike Jose's ones which to be honest I mostly didn't understand the point of.

Today Matic for Cesc though didn't work, it should've been for Oscar.

You can make those excuses for most of the games Jose was in charge as well. Penalty misses and not given, lack of goals despite bossing a game, one mistake costing us a win or a draw.

I would have preferred RLC coming on instead of Matic, If anything Matic is still woefully under performing and while he did not individually contribute to the goal, I feel like his introduction for Cesc actually made us weaker. On a positive I like that we are possessing the ball more and trying to attack more rather than pass it sideways. While I am not happy that we conceded 2 goals, I am more unhappy at the fact that we could not score 3. 

Under Jose our players would have bottled it even worse and lost a couple of the matches we've drawn so yes, it is an improvement. 

 

Total speculation on your part is not. Therefore, totally sterile as a post. What's more, it's completely arrogant.

Can't still people believe results got Jose the sack. When a manager hints there are traitors in his team, suggests the team his average and it was his effort that achieved success in the previous season (despite a gross spend of ~291m in his three seasons), he was clearly asking for it and he got it with a very healthy severance pay. He isn't the 1st to have a poor title defence, city went through similar without all the circus. Same he did 1st time out when he accused Roman of 'not giving him eggs to make an omelet'

 

What complete bollocks - if we'd been in the top 4 or close to it in December do you honestly think that the owner would have dispatched Jose?!? What a completely ludicrous statement. As for the rest of your dribble 'that he was asking for (to be sacked)' - more crap from you - especially given the fact that the owner is on record as stating that he didn't want to sack him. And you morph into gross spend (instead of nett spend - which by the way is a third of City's during the same period - ie. 70 million) which is irrelevant. Then you bring up more crap like severance pay - tell us, how much was the severance money in total paid to Jose? The fact is, you don't know do you? Then you have the temerity to equate this termination with the circumstances of the last termination and, for good measure, throw in a quote that is completely divorced from its context as to when Jose said it. You're not the full quid are you - clearly you never were as your previous untold 'mistakes' in you posts attest. Moreover, it's insulting to have to be presented with your posts on this site & let me tell you - you're one of the prime reasons why the likes of Chippy & other longterm posters have left this site because they simply haven't got the patience anymore to have to wade through such dirge from the likes of you.

"What complete bollocks - if we'd been in the top 4 or close to it in December do you honestly think that the owner would have dispatched Jose?!?"

Before december, the results have been dire, he could have been sacked at any point before then

"What a completely ludicrous statement. As for the rest of your dribble 'that he was asking for (to be sacked)' - more crap from you - especially given the fact that the owner is on record as stating that he didn't want to sack him."

Despite your insults, its nice you contradict yourself and support my point (the owner didn't want to sack him which he could have easily based on how the results were but had no choice after is unbelievable post-match vs Leicester)

"And you morph into gross spend (instead of nett spend - which by the way is a third of City's during the same period - ie. 70 million) which is irrelevant."

Oh really? Let's all forget almost 300m was spent on recruiting players because its only 70m 'net' that should be referenced.

"Then you bring up more crap like severance pay - tell us, how much was the severance money in total paid to Jose?"

The man was earning a rumored estimated 8m/yr, it isn't daunting to realize his severance pay won't be peanuts especially when he just signed a new contract.

"Then you have the temerity to equate this termination with the circumstances of the last termination and, for good measure, throw in a quote that is completely divorced from its context as to when Jose said it. You're not the full quid are you - clearly you never were as your previous untold 'mistakes' in you posts attest. Moreover, it's insulting to have to be presented with your posts on this site & let me tell you - you're one of the prime reasons why the likes of Chippy & other longterm posters have left this site because they simply haven't got the patience anymore to have to wade through such dirge from the likes of you."

Rubbish, idiotic use of grammar with actually no point made. Utterly retarded to drag in Chippy's name into the equation unless you're his advocate.

A shame I rose to your bait as your post is nothing but that but I couldn't stomach your drivel this time.

Edited January 14, 201610 yr by lesblues

My personal opinion is when you're short term replacement you get judge on short term results.

You're appointed for an immediate injection of improvement in results.

So far I'm still thinking we were short sighted to sack Mourinho.

So we had to wait till we find ourselves behind Aston Villa before we make the right decision! I think you forgot how bad we were under José.

Crikey Les Epsilon it'd take you 3 hours to watch 60 minutes & even then your understanding would be patchy at best. You made a statement that Jose was not sacked because of results. It is an indefensible statement: the best you can come up in an attempt to support your statement was speculation that he could have been sacked at any time before he was sacked! But the fact was that he wasn't was he! So not only was your original statement ludicrous, you not only don't even have the grace & honesty to recant, but then you resort to unintelligible fictions to support the original heresy. 

 

To further opine as you do that I have in some imagined way 'contradicted' myself is completely disingenuous. Jose was sacked because of our results & our position in the table: pure & simple. The owner didn't want to do it & the reason he didn't want to do it is because he knew that both he & the board had rested on their laurels over summer concerning refreshing the squad & because he knew that many of the 1st team squad were under-performing or, not good enough anymore - so he took it upon himself to tell the 1st team squad that he did not want to sack Jose in order that the players could infer that they were now playing for their futures. Now I know that it may be supremely difficult for someone of your level of intelligence to understand but understand it you must - even if I have to spell it out to you expressly.

 

In consequence of the above, your further statement concerning the gross spend over '3' years is not only inaccurate - Jose only being back here for 2.5 years only - but is of little relevance. Moreover, even when we look at the nett spend for that 2.5 years (which is what one looks at in any event) we find that of the nett 70 million odd spent approximately 52 million was nett spent in 13/14, there was a 4 million nett gain in 14/15 and about 28 million nett spent in summer 15/16: ie a pittance when viewed against the likes of City, United & Arse. So what is you point? As usual with you there doesn't seem to be one. If any point can be made it must be that over the last 3 transfer windows we have rested on our laurels & did not support the thenn manager. So, somewhat paradoxically, your initial 'gross' spend statement has undermined your opinion.

 

The same goes for your referencing Jose's severance pay: what on earth has that got to do with anything exactly? The fact is that it doesn't & nor does it in any way support your original statement that Jose was sacked for other reasons apart from results: again, if anything, should it have been the case that such a severance amount was high, it would have been yet another disincentive for the owner & the board to sack him. However, and in any event, Jose refused any severance monies whatsoever so what in fact is your point?!? Again - there isn't one - it's just more dirge from you but hey, at least you're consistent - with the dirge that is.

 

You then have a go at me in respect to my grammar - from you of all posters!!! Have a look at your last sentence of your post sunshine. Well apart from the odd spelling mistake of mine here is the news: my grammar was ok. And in respect to the number of posters who have had it with you: do you want me to exhaustively list them for you? Chippy was one of many. Be gone.

So Hiddink's record in the league since coming in to replace Jose.

P4 W1 D3 L0

Both home matches we've drawn despite scoring first.

Our win was against a Palace side missing all their best attacking players.

Is this really an improvement from Mourinho?

If we were unbeaten under José, he won't have been sacked. So I need you to answer your question.

Improvement enough to justify sacking our most successful manager ever off the back of league and cup winning campaign?

Not for me.

Sorry bro, THIS ISN'T JOSE MOURINHO FC, IT'S CHELSEA FC. So i will definitely sack Jose after the Eva stuff, bashing the team publicly, losing at home to Bournemouth and the overall bad results.

Total speculation on your part is not. Therefore, totally sterile as a post. What's more, it's completely arrogant.

You were probably blind when we were losing matches under José

Really amazed you took so much time to write an 'article' in response to my post. Although, I will quickly just point this out once more amongst your nonsensical ramblings (as usual).

"The owner didn't want to

do it & the reason he didn't want to do it is

because he knew that both he & the board had

rested on their laurels over summer concerning

refreshing the squad & because he knew that

many of the 1st team squad were under-

performing or, not good enough anymore - so

he took it upon himself to tell the 1st team

squad that he did not want to sack Jose in order

that the players could infer that they were now

playing for their futures."

I know you do realize this is unbelievable stupid. The owner 'knew' he failed Jose in the summer (I won't even go into how you got this juicy information) so he told the players they are playing for their future?. As much as I respect Roman I sometime find it annoying he's an introvert but from the club's official statement when Jose was backed it was stated he had the players to turn around results and when he was sacked, the club statement with precisely these words "The club’s focus is now on ensuring our

talented squad reaches its potential" was released. So its either your have a 'very reliable' source in the boardroom or your ability to write fanfiction is unbelievable.