On October 13th, 1984, Chelsea played Watford and duly lost 2-3, having opened the scoring in the 7th minute. Any Chelsea supporter of a certain vintage will not have been surprised by this result at all. It was the definition of a “Chelsea Thing” in those days.
Interesting to note that Kerry Dixon’s brace was interrupted by goals from Kenny Jackett (more recently manager of Millwall, Wolves, Portsmouth and Orient) and John Barnes who needs no introduction. Some might be surprised that Watford’s opener was scored by a certain Richard Jobson. No, not the lead singer of punk band The Skids, although that would have been a surprise.
The main surprise that day happened before the match. Popular band Culture Club fronted by the controversial androgynous ‘Boy George’ were at Stamford Bridge for the filming of a pop promo for their single ‘The Medal Song’. Like Chelsea’s performance that day, not one of Culture Club’s best to be honest.
Unsurprisingly ‘Boy George’ had to endure some chanting and ‘banter’ from the Chelsea supporters in the terraces. I can’t really repeat what was chanted, but it had something to do with Boy Georges’ football ability, I believe, and his skill at receiving a pass. George appeared to be flattered by the Chelsea supporter’s chants and responded with a Churchillian V for Victory sign; or something like that.
Fast forward 38 years and Chelsea supporters are arguably facing an entirely different idea of a culture club.
The Todd Boehly consortium have been in control of Chelsea for over 100 days now and they have not been hanging about.
Many of us presumed that we would have evolution rather than revolution as the club changed ownership for the first time in 19 years. It is quite common in global organisations that several of the previous management remain in the organisation after a takeover to ensure a seamless transition and avoid the culture shocks, instability and uncertainty that can arise from wholesale change.
Boehly has bucked that trend comprehensively with significant departures from the previous regime, starting of course with Guy Laurence (no tears cried for that departure); Chairman Bruce Buck; de facto Director of Football Marina Granovskaia and technical director and Chelsea legend, ex-player Petr Cech. And this week the departure of Steve Atkins, the likeable and widely respected Director of Communications, has announced that he is leaving the club after 14 years.
Of course, the biggest and most alarming departure was Thomas Tuchel, on the very day Boehly & Co celebrated their 100th day in charge.
Given that Tuchel was acknowledged as one of the elite coaches in football and had backed that up with Chelsea’s second Champions’ League trophy a mere 15 months ago, as well as the UEFA Super Cup, FIFA Club World Cup, two FA Cup Finals and a League Cup final (the last two lost only via a penalty shootout) and of course two top four finishes guaranteeing the all-important Champions’ League football.
And we thought that Mr Abramovich was ruthless! It is true to say that Chelsea’s recent form had not been too impressive but if you believe that Tuchel did not have the ability to turn that around I would suggest otherwise. Mitigating factors regarding events last season should also be taken into account. The tail end of the Covid pandemic, injuries to key players, the abject behaviour from Chelsea’s £90m so called striker Romelu Lukaku and most significant of all, the Government sanctions which culminated in Boehly taking control of the club.
The fact that Tuchel showed the leadership needed in arguably the greatest existential threat the club has ever known (and that is saying something) when the so-called leaders of the club in the senior management team all hid under their desks should tell you all you need to know about the character of Thomas Tuchel.
However, I get it. It seems pretty clear that Tuchel simply was not Boehly’s man and made no attempt to be that man. In the corporate world, everything depends upon who has the power. Usually, your boss has it and you don’t, and Tuchel has had a painful reminder of that fact.
We keep hearing that Boehly et al want a new culture at the club and it is apparent that Tuchel did not fit in to that culture.
I’m intrigued by this decision and the idea of what, precisely, the new regime mean by implementing a new ‘culture’ at the club?
What actually is the identity, culture or dare I say it brand value (for the marketeers and businessmen) of Chelsea Football club. Many have suggested in the past that Chelsea have been struggling for an identity for many years.
This, of course, is errant nonsense in the same way that opposition fans accuse Chelsea of having no history. All clubs have history, but some clubs have a more successful history than others. And in a similar vein all clubs have a culture or an identity.
For the majority of Chelsea’s 117 years of existence Chelsea’s culture could have been described as mercurial; or more literally up and down. Long standing Chelsea supporters would recognise this as the team beating a superior team one week only to lose to an inferior team the next week. For many years Chelsea had a penchant for snatching defeat from the jaws of victory and completely shooting themselves in the foot rather than the back of the net. Marco Worral of this parish calls is ‘glorious unpredictability’ and he is right.
The club did this with aplomb both on and off the pitch but retained a certain charm and dare I say it glamour due to our privileged location in the heart of one of London’s most exclusive neighbourhoods and the showbiz style reflected in the supporters and at times some of the players.
But things got serious the last time ownership changed. Style, glamour and frankly all fart and no pooh was not enough for Roman Abramovich. He wanted more; he wanted to win and in fact he wanted to win it all. And he did.
It is fair to say that Mr Abramovich single handed changed the entire culture of the club from one that might win the odd cup competition occasionally to one that would be there or there abouts when the league and European titles were being handed out. 21 trophies in 19 years and more than any other English club bears testament to the winning culture, often at any cost, that Abramovich and his millions embedded into the psyche of the players, club, media and supporters of the club.
Given how successful this period of the club’s history has been I find it hard to understand Bohely & Co when they state that they want a new culture and make Chelsea an even more successful club than it has been to date.
Do they want a winning it all but in a better way culture? Like Brian Clough turning up at Leeds united in 1974 and telling the players to chuck their medals in the bin as they’d won them by cheating. On face value this sounds like nonsense, but there may well be some sense to this if one reads through the lines.
It appears that the new owners wish to change from a management (ownership) style of “short-term power trips” to one of “joined-up thinking” and “long-term strategy”. This of course is a massive gamble and will require patience from everyone, not least the supporters who I suspect will have become used to the annual trophy success and will not take kindly for a period of drought.
I can, however, think of two areas where the new ownership can genuinely attempt to take the club forward.
The first is in fact an original Abramovich idea, albeit never followed through due to his impatience and desire to win.
Invest in and develop the finest academy in football to produce a production line of ultimately world class players, all home grown, and supplement this with some experienced and world class elite players. Of course, there is one eye on saving and/or earning money here, but as a model it is surely more sustainable than ‘spaffing’ a couple of hundred million on players who end up being surplus to requirements far too quickly. Furthermore, most match going supporters delight in seeing home grown players coming into the side and doing well.
But this is the crux of it. For owners who have spent £4bn on buying the club, success must mean making money. They are not in it just for the fun and the potential glory and nor was Abramovich to a certain degree. And to be successful by this criterion consistently winning trophies will be required, not in the long-term, but now.
In truth Chelsea should have won even more under Abramovich – certainly more Premier League and Champions’ League trophies. Who is to say that had the club been run in a more stable and less knee jerk fashion that they may well have done.
Being successful on the pitch is the gateway to being successful in revenue terms off pitch. ‘Twas ever thus.
And this for me is where the real gamble in changing the culture and even more so in entrusting an inexperienced (at this level) manager in Graham Potter with the task. It could all go horribly wrong and then what will the new owners do? Do they stick or twist – the eternal question for every gambler?
Of course, it would be better if we were to hear what the ideas behind changing Chelsea’s culture are from the horse’s mouth. Surely someone could have advised Boehly that the most important group to convince of his ideas are the Chelsea supporters and not some financial networkers at an obscure conference in New York.
I hope they rectify this and become more transparent and communicative with supporters as that would most definitely represent an improvement in culture. And therein rests the main point. The culture of a football club does not belong to the people who own it for a brief period of the club’s history. It belongs to and has been forged by the supporters who have followed the club for generations and are at the heart of its history.
First published in cfcuk fanzine September 2022
