The football manager is perhaps, more so than any other role in the world of sport, the ultimate example of the polarization that can, and does occur, in the minds of most sports enthusiasts. Opinions vary week-to-week, match-to-match.
One moment, you’re the best manager in the world, the “chosen one” to take a massive club forward, or the “special one” who will bring back the fortunes of this once invincible juggernaut of a football club.
But the same enthusiasts -- and this includes both the supporters and the pundits, oh so eager to share their opinions -- will not hesitate to hack you down to size, and throw you off this pretty pedestal. Ironic, given that this pedestal is often created for the manager by these very enthusiasts.
Much like the conductor in charge of an orchestra, or the director behind the camera, the football manager’s role is not the easiest to grasp -- after all, it’s the players who ultimately play on the pitch, just as it’s the musicians who ultimately perform the music and the actors who deliver the performances which create the movie.
If it was all up to the musicians in the orchestra, and actors in a movie or TV series, or the players on a football pitch, then there would never be a mediocre musical performance, never be a critically panned movie or TV series, and of course, never be a poorly played football match.
But of course, this isn’t what happens. The conductor, the director, the manager -- they keep everything together, and though they are recognized and celebrated for their work, it appears that people sometimes don’t fully grasp just how integral their role is to the composition of their respective team.
Our world is a world increasingly obsessed with numbers, with data, and with tangible evidence. Though there are tangible parameters to judge all three professions mentioned above, and the football manager arguably should be judged by providing tangible quantifiable parameters, it’s not as black and white as that.
Results matter, and often, even take precedence. But a football manager’s job should not be judged solely by the position he brings the team at the end of the season, or the silverware that he may have won.
Which brings me to Jose Mourinho, the recently sacked manager of Manchester United, which remains -- despite its wobbles and issues since the departure of legendary manager Sir Alex Ferguson -- the biggest football club in the world, as measured by the very quantifiable and tangible parameter of revenue earned.
Jose Mourinho is unquestionably one of the greatest managers in the history of football, and along with Pep Guardiola, the most decorated manager of the 21st century. His accolades are incredible, his resume as impressive as any, and regardless of how the rest of his career in management goes, he has etched his name into footballing lore.
Jose Mourinho is also a prime example of me questioning whether results, tangible evidence, and quantifiable parameters should be the be all end all.
Tangible evidence is his three premier league titles, more than all the other current managers in the league combined. Tangible evidence also, is him getting the sack three times in the premier league.
Tangible is him winning the league in every country he has coached in, but tangible also his inability to last at a single club beyond three seasons, in a career which has now spanned over 18 years.
Among his intangible brilliance is the incredible tactical mastery and preparation he goes through, but also intangible yet much discussed is his win-at-any-cost mentality, his dull, dreary approach to football that does not excite supporters, and rendering football to a game of winners and losers rather than a sport.
There’s also the supposed toxicity he brings everywhere he goes, his disregard for respecting opposition managers -- his famous eye poke to Pep Guardiola’s then-assistant and now deceased manager at Barcelona Tito Villanova being amongst his many offenses -- they all stack up.
Until 2012, the footballing world seemed to tolerate these antics as Mourinho being Mourinho, and because the success he brought far outweighed the toxicity as the residue. But his last two tenures at Chelsea and Manchester United, where he won one league title with the former and none with the latter, seem to have gotten the world to notice that maybe his approach to “the beautiful game” isn’t really beautiful at all.
In the aftermath of sacking Mourinho, Manchester United appointed Ole Gunnar Solskjær, who in his first game in charge, guided the club to scoring five goals for the first time since Sir Alex’s departure, with the coach lavishing praise on the players -- the same players Jose continued to criticize as not being good enough.
It remains to be seen what Mourinho will do next -- but it seems that, just like Chelsea fans, and Inter Milan fans, and Real Madrid fans, Manchester United fans will be quick to move on from him.
And it seems that the footballing world will as well.
AHM Mustafizur Rahman is an Editorial Assistant at the Dhaka Tribune.