Source: Telegraph
Chelsea's priority has to be unity
You could tell on the pitch that their former manager Luiz Felipe Scolari had lost the dressing room and that the players had split into different factions. You did not need a trained eye to know that Chelsea were in trouble. [LNB]Their performance at Old Trafford last month was appalling, a capitulation beyond belief. The players' body language showed they did not want to be there and it was as though they were saying to Manchester United, 'It's your's'. In a game of that magnitude it was an absolute disgrace. [LNB]The situation developed from there and ultimately you had to point the finger at the manager because he was the one in charge. When you lose the dressing room it is always very difficult to get it back – you need to get shot of whoever you think is causing trouble and then bring in fresh blood, and this is exactly what I think Chelsea are going to do. [LNB]Whatever you thought of Jose Mourinho, he was unbelievably good at identifying a problem and eliminating it right away, so that his dressing room was as one and when Chelsea were on the pitch, they were there as a team. Chelsea now are nowhere near a team. Sir Alex Ferguson has also followed the Mourinho approach at United: when, three seasons ago, he got rid of Ruud van Nistelrooy, he had no doubt seen that the player was disaffected, and while everybody at the time thought it was a huge mistake it turned out to be a masterstroke. [LNB]Guus Hiddink has a fantastic track record but then so has Scolari. I would not be able to tell if he is the right man for Chelsea until he properly starts there. Chelsea's demise has been a long time coming, and it began when Mourinho no longer had total control over football matters. Their owner Roman Abramovich wanted to interfere with the judgment of a manager who had brought Chelsea unprecedented success. We had thought that Chelsea would go from strength to strength, that they would change the face of English football, but what you find in big-time football is that the difference between being omnipotent and being one of the pack is a fine line. [LNB]What you have got to have are players who want to do well, not only for them-selves but for the club. It is impossible for all Chelsea's players to like each other – human nature dictates otherwise – but it is not about liking, it is about relying on one another when you go out on the pitch. In the 621 times I played for Liverpool, somebody – whether it was a player or the captain – would shout 'Be together' and that is the most important thing you can have as a team when you come under pressure. [LNB]Chelsea have not got this and I suppose it is a sign of modern-day football where you don't need to have personal pride any more, you don't need to have hunger and desire, because you have so much money. The shining lights are the ones who will give you 100 per cent and try harder when they're having a bad time, but in the modern day these are few and far between. You have too many who, when they get beaten, will just want to go and blame somebody else. [LNB]Previously, if you had a Florent Malouda in your team you would just leave him out, and he would end up losing the money, whereas now if you leave him out it doesn't matter. The player will say, if he is having a fracas with a team-mate, that he will go elsewhere, and he will have no problems picking up another club or making more money. [LNB]The guys who are causing the problem at Chelsea are not even the best, and this is a bit unusual. John Terry and Frank Lampard are, I would imagine, the most committed to doing well for the club, which leaves Chelsea having to do something about their centre-forwards. [LNB]Nicolas Anelka is the top scorer in the Premier League but against Manchester United and Liverpool he was basically a joke in the way he performed. Then Didier Drogba decided that he does not want to be there either. Chelsea are finding that this kind of attitude affects everybody in the team. [LNB]
