Ancelotti why he failed at Chelsea?

I must have asked this somewhere already, so apologies again. But i wanted to confirm again exactly why he failed at Chelsea in the end?

I remember the double year of cos, Drogba, Malouda were pretty much the key players. Then at the start of the following season the team were winning 5-0s, but suddenly after that it all collapsed pretty quickly and never recovered. Ancelotti moved on that summer if I remember correctly. So what was the reasons for the fast dip from the double winning? Just the usual less motivation after success?

Im particularly interested since everyone is talking about how good he is having being rumoured for the Real job now

A combination of several things, I'd say.

1) The summer immediately following the Double, so many key players in the squad were released. The likes of Ballack, Coley, Belletti, Deco, Carvalho, etc. who were all important players in the side all went at once. And to add to it, they were never replaced.

2) Injuries. Drogba had Malaria, Frank was injured for a time, etc., and Carlo's lack of rotation tired the side out massively.

3) All was not right behind the scenes - chief among them being the inexplicable sacking of Butch Wilkins, and the fallout following it. The fans were disgusted with the whole mess the club had once again plunged ITSELF into, putting up things like this at the club's training ground, etc. Add to that the owner splashing £70m+ in January on Luiz and Torres in an attempt to jumpstart the side and forcing them on Carlo, one or both of whom he didn't even want, so that created problems as well.

It's important to remember, though, that he did finish 2nd that season and came within 3 points and a win at Old Trafford in April of moving back into 1st, so it was hardly a trainwreck. However, the squad were getting old and the club was in desperate need of a transition, and Carlo just isn't a builder, so the owner moved him on. He was also way too soft, a yes-man, and was more worried about being a friend to the players than being their manager, so in the long-run, the decision to get rid of him was the right one.

To add to what Shed said, he also promised to use our youth players but very rarely did. This annoyed many fans as these players could have gone on loan.

I still liked him though, should've been kept

We would have never won the CL if he was.

Thanks a lot for that now I recall the problems

Just thinking about it, the likes of Deco who was such class in Porto and Barca, just didnt fit into Chelsea...

Wilkins I remember the timing of it too, a lot of ppl I read saying afterwards his sacking was also the time a lot of things started to collapse.

I guess with Abromovich there things will never be perfect as he likes ppl who will take his orders and play his favourite players

Kick wrote:We would have never won the CL if he was.

you cant say that with any certanty, if Carletto had been kept on that entire season would've run differently, we could've been relegated or we could've won the Europen trebble, its impossible to know

ShedEnd1905 wrote:A combination of several things, I'd say.

1) The summer immediately following the Double, so many key players in the squad were released. The likes of Ballack, Coley, Belletti, Deco, Carvalho, etc. who were all important players in the side all went at once. And to add to it, they were never replaced.

2) Injuries. Drogba had Malaria, Frank was injured for a time, etc., and Carlo's lack of rotation tired the side out massively.

3) All was not right behind the scenes - chief among them being the inexplicable sacking of Butch Wilkins, and the fallout following it. The fans were disgusted with the whole mess the club had once again plunged ITSELF into, putting up things like this at the club's training ground, etc. Add to that the owner splashing £70m+ in January on Luiz and Torres in an attempt to jumpstart the side and forcing them on Carlo, one or both of whom he didn't even want, so that created problems as well.

It's important to remember, though, that he did finish 2nd that season and came within 3 points and a win at Old Trafford in April of moving back into 1st, so it was hardly a trainwreck. However, the squad were getting old and the club was in desperate need of a transition, and Carlo just isn't a builder, so the owner moved him on. He was also way too soft, a yes-man, and was more worried about being a friend to the players than being their manager, so in the long-run, the decision to get rid of him was the right one.

Perfectly said. He replaced these experience players with youngsters like bruma who failed when called upon. But the main reason was probably Torres for his sacking

Main reason was Torres IMO as well, we simply failed in front.. started adding pressure. Wilkins left, things got out of hand...

ShedEnd1905 wrote:A combination of several things, I'd say.

1) The summer immediately following the Double, so many key players in the squad were released. The likes of Ballack, Coley, Belletti, Deco, Carvalho, etc. who were all important players in the side all went at once. And to add to it, they were never replaced.

2) Injuries. Drogba had Malaria, Frank was injured for a time, etc., and Carlo's lack of rotation tired the side out massively.

3) All was not right behind the scenes - chief among them being the inexplicable sacking of Butch Wilkins, and the fallout following it. The fans were disgusted with the whole mess the club had once again plunged ITSELF into, putting up things like this at the club's training ground, etc. Add to that the owner splashing £70m+ in January on Luiz and Torres in an attempt to jumpstart the side and forcing them on Carlo, one or both of whom he didn't even want, so that created problems as well.

It's important to remember, though, that he did finish 2nd that season and came within 3 points and a win at Old Trafford in April of moving back into 1st, so it was hardly a trainwreck. However, the squad were getting old and the club was in desperate need of a transition, and Carlo just isn't a builder, so the owner moved him on. He was also way too soft, a yes-man, and was more worried about being a friend to the players than being their manager, so in the long-run, the decision to get rid of him was the right one.

FFS

Ray Wilkins has said it countless times Ancelotti was the person who wanted both of them signed.

“I know for a fact that Carlo wanted Fernando Torres and David Luiz so Mr Abramovich went out and got them.

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/sport/football/4750100/Ray-Wilkins-Chelsea-boss-dilemma-due-to-Roman-Abramovich.html#ixzz2RzE5TzHK

Also Ancelotti has said multiple times that they were his signings.

Not believing Ancelotti and Wilkins, but trusting the media bs.

Wow.... man, sometimes I dont know what to believe since we are all just trying our best to read whats out there

Anyway, I think the fact remains for me that... Ancelotti seems a bit like Mou, overrated

I don't buy that for a minute, in Torres' first game Carlo played a 4-1-3-2 with drogba and Torres up top and anelka behind them, and then went on to use 4-4-2, 4-4-1-1, 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 in only a few months, if carletto really wanted Torres for that long I'm sure he would've known what system he wanted to use

At the end of the day, do you honestly expect Wilkins to come out and say "roman thinks he's playing FM so he bought Luiz and Torres in and just expected it to work"?

fatman123 wrote:I don't buy that for a minute, in Torres' first game Carlo played a 4-1-3-2 with drogba and Torres up top and anelka behind them, and then went on to use 4-4-2, 4-4-1-1, 4-3-3 and 4-2-3-1 in only a few months, if carletto really wanted Torres for that long I'm sure he would've known what system he wanted to use

At the end of the day, do you honestly expect Wilkins to come out and say "roman thinks he's playing FM so he bought Luiz and Torres in and just expected it to work"?

If that was the case he would say so, if they weren't Carlo signing he would say they weren't. Read the full interview he doesn't have much good to say about Roman methods, so don't know why he would stop there and not be honest.

Wilkins is a very blunt man he says what he thinks.


To your question about Carlo changing formations. Things were not working and results were poor so naturally he would change his formation. But mainly he did not expect Torres to be so shit, as i have said many times i do not blame carlo for Torres signing nobody expected Torres to turn into a donkey.

But in the end i hate it how people blame Roman for Carlo failing, Carlo failure ultimately lies on his own and bad luck. Bad luck being our two central and influential player being injured and out of form: Lampard and Drogba.

I'm sure ancelloti wanted torres back then, he was still looked at in high regards in 2010, and by looking at the above posts and the switching of formations, with lackluster playing especially with how poor torres' first touches were. Also this was the time I started to follow chelsea regularly, I noticed no real progression (even though we finished 2nd). I think the prospect of AVB being a new mourniho also played a part. I didn't like the sacking of ancelloti, but the squad needed new direction, and its still being refreshed and going in the right direction. Nowadays, the only reason chelsea are lagging a little behind than in the previous 5-6 years is the rise of manchester city and tottenham, but then again it was liverpool and arsenal then too.

Ok I get it...just a combination of things that leads to the inevitable.... but still I guess somethings we will enver know why. Why Torres turned shit, why Drogba, Malouda, Lampard just slumped.... Malouda got so unfavoured so fast it was just weird....but it is not the first time I seen this in football, even with the same manager, let alone so many changes at Chelsea all the time...

I've read many articles saying that Carlo had wanted Aguero but got Torres instead. And as someone already said, Carlo was a cool guy but he was also really foolish to release key-players after the Double. Of course some of them had to be moved out from the club (Joe Cole was never himself again after that knee injury) but on the other hand I'm sure that there was no reason to release Ballack.

Carlo wanted and I wanted too, but he stomped Luiz's ass...

As a fan of a club that has been in that position i will tell you for certain that releasing those veterans was the right choice. Inviting them for another season would certainly have kept the team stable but there was the question of if they had the same hunger or motivation.

I never questioned Franks or John's devotion and ambition for the club, players like these u keep until they cannot walk anymore, because they instill a sense of pride and work ethic within the squad. However for me it was clear Ballack , Deco , Belletti , Carvalho and Anelka needed a change in scenery, or simply didn't have it in them anymore.

This was made very apparent in the Cl were hunger and motivation counts for allot, most of these veterans had already proven themselves at that stage. The loss against Inter was damaging in several ways, it was a mental blow to most of the senior squad members because they were far away the best English side that year and probably in the top 3 strongest teams and had come into that tie on incredible form. When the final whistle blew i think most of them realised they wouldn't have a better chance at winning cl again.

Carlo having been witness to his team becoming stagnant over time due to lack of motivation and ambition, didn't want to see the same happen at Chelsea so he let the players go he felt was not going to be integral to the future success of the team. It had to be done and imo its better to start a transition sooner than later.

Ancelotti failed?

Vibe wrote:Ancelotti failed?

We're using the Roman Abramovich System for rating managers here, pal. Get with the picture
yea