"You don't know what you're doing!"
This is the chant that has been echoing around Stamford Bridge with increasing frequency and volume in recent weeks.
After a seriously bad run of form in the league, Luiz Felipe Scolari was today released from his duties as head coach at Chelsea Football Club, making him the third manager to be sacked by the club in less than 18 months.
Whilst it was painfully obvious he was living on borrowed time, I don't feel that this is the right point in the season to sack the manager. It puts more pressure on a club which is already teetering precariously on the precipice of missing out on Champions League football next season.
Much speculation is being bandied as to why someone of the calibre of Scolari failed where so many others, excluding the Special One, have, err, failed as well. The big one seems to have been Scolari's inability to adapt to club management after such a long spell in the international game.
I would accept that as a reason for his failure, but then why have Chelsea shortlisted Guus Hiddink? He has been the manager of the Russian national team since 2006.
Whilst Hiddink was successful at PSV Eindhoven between 2002-05, he has been very hit and miss at the other clubs he has managed, and his major success has come at international level. This would seem like a ridiculous appointment, although not quite as ridiculous as asking Avram Grant to return.
Grant was brought in on a three year deal, but everybody saw his appointment for what it was: a stop-gap measure until a better prospect came along. I feel it is insulting to him to ask him to come back and essentially do the same again, and I think he'd be a mug to accept the job after the way he was treated.
He took Chelsea to the Champions League final and was repaid with the sack. Go to Portsmouth Avram, it'll be a better place for you.
In my opinion, the performances that have led Chelsea from the giddy heights at the start of the season to where they are now can be place squarely on the shoulders of the team. It's essentially the same team that began this campaign by consistently scoring three, four, or five goals a game—the only notable absences being Michael Essien and Joe Cole.
So what changed? The manager was the same, the tactics were working in the beginning, so what sparked the chain of events that has left Chelsea fans speculating as to who will be in charge yet again? You'll have to ask the boys in blue if you want the answer to that. If you get it, let me know.