Paging Dr. Hiddink

Picture: Chelsea TV

For many people, myself included, today is the first day back at work after a welcome break. It was an opportunity to sleep in, to recharge and, even in the strange circumstances we find ourselves, enjoy a Christmas with the ones we love (or, at least, those we’re allowed to spend time with). For Frank Lampard, I suspect, this Monday morning is simply the continuation of a nightmare that has not, apparently, been ended by his wife Christine elbowing him in the ribs to wake up and stop him turning restlessly.

Yesterday’s performance by Chelsea was one of the most toothless, abject displays I’ve seen by The Blues in all the years I’ve been watching them. Which is many. And I’m still only talking about the first half against Manchester City, who had monstered the home side with three goals within the first 34 minutes. If there was one consolation, it’s that Lampard’s side held at only three for the remaining sixty-odd minutes, Callum Hudson-Odoi’s 92nd-minute strike never more than a token. 

The almost immediate conclusion, as the final whistle blew, was that the pressure on Lampard had just been cranked up considerably, with Chelsea ending the Christmas period in eighth place and a woeful record of three defeats in five games that netted only a single win. At risk of stating the bleeding obvious, this is not what Roman Abramovich shelled out £250 million in the summer for. That’s the stark truth, regardless of the more rational analysis that results are never instant, no matter how much you spend. If you look at the indifference afforded Jürgen Klopp, Ole Gunnar Solskjaer and even City’s Pep Guardiola in their first months of management at their respective clubs, progress takes patience and time. Unfortunately, those are commodities the Russian oligarch has repeatedly shown limited supplies of. 

Time, in particular, is relative. A month or so ago, Solskjaer’s future at Manchester United was in grave doubt. Today they sit just behind Liverpool on goal difference alone, on the back of a ten-match unbeaten run. For Lampard, a month is a long time. “I know that it doesn’t come that easy,” he said after yesterday’s savaging by City. “I know where we’re at, whether it puts pressure on me or not. A month ago, everyone’s asking me when I’ll sign a new contract and now people will be saying different things because in quick succession over a tight, busy period, we’ve lost four games of football.” 

It’s true: when Chelsea were on the up they were suddenly being talked about as title contenders. But with every opportunity over the festive period they’ve had to add points and climb the narrowly spaced top six, they’ve blown it. Stoically Lampard has maintained the manager-under-pressure mantra of “My job is to keep working”, but if reports this morning are to be believed, the Chelsea hierarchy has already started shortlisting potential replacements. That in itself is to be predicted, given the capricious history of the club’s owner, but it doesn’t diminish the dull headache produced by the prospect of yet another managerial schism at the club and, in particular, one involving one of the club’s most celebrated former players.

“I played here for a long time,” Lampard said yesterday. “I understand that the minute you lose a few games in a short period of time, then everyone looks and ask questions and the expectations are different this year, because everyone says, ‘Well, you spent this amount of money?’. The reality is [that] a lot of the younger players that have come in are new, are young, have been injured, have not played together. It’s the first time I’ve been able to play Ziyech, Pulisic and Timo Werner in the same team. If we’re expecting the relationship between them three to be the same as [City’s] Sterling, De Bruyne and Silva, then there’s a lot of expectations that are not real.” As ever, an intelligent and cogent argument from Lampard, and to anyone else, it stands up. But Roman Abramovich isn’t anyone else. As this blog has documented on many occasions in the history of Chelsea’s revolving front door, managers have come and gone with alarming regularity. The most notable departure for me is always that of Carlo Ancellotti, hired as the exalted Milan maestro, who delivered a league and cup double in his first term at Chelsea, and was gone by the end of his second for having the temerity of only achieving a Premier League runners-up spot.

“This club has to take some pain to get where we want to get to, because any build or rebuild - and the ban that we had, and the players we have brought in - takes pain,” added Lampard. True, but the transfer ban of the 2019-20 season is starting to become old news. And the players he brought in during the summer - most notably Werner and the high-expectation Kai Havertz (even taking his bout of COVID into account) - should by now be at least showing signs of pulling their weight. And that comes down to leadership.

That was in short supply yesterday. Actually, it was non-existent. Until City slackened off after the break, job done, Chelsea were anaemic in all departments. The entire backline was caught all at sea by City for all three goals by Ilkay Gundogan, Phil Foden and Kevin de Bruyne. Club captain César Azpilicueta, normally so dependent out on the right, was constantly caught out; his inside centre-back Kurt Zouma looked disinterested; veteran Thiago Silva - nominally, the player brought in for his leadership - appeared uncommunicative; and even left-back Ben Chilwell, one of Chelsea’s brighter acquisitions, looked off his game. The defence wasn’t helped, either, by a midfield providing absolutely no protection whatsoever, or offering much stimulus when they did have the chance of going forward. And as for the frontline, utterly toothless. Werner summed up his current run of form by kicking the flag instead of the ball on a corner late in the day.

It’s times like this that Chelsea fans and commentators alike get nostalgic, and reach for the past. It wasn’t so long ago that the current Blues boss was part of a spine that had Petr Čech at its base, John Terry in command at the back, Lampard in the middle, and Didier Drogba at the top. Lampard, now, needs to tap into that. While Drogba could go missing in games when he wasn’t interested (similarly, Diego Costa more recently), when in the mood he was as tenacious a street fighter as Terry was the ‘Captain. Leader. Legend.’ blunt instrument at the back. It won games. It won titles. It may not have won friends, but that’s not what you’re in football for.

The solution? Well, it would be easy to pontificate from the sofa that Lampard needs to make more use of Olivier Giroud and less of Mason Mount, who has, it should be said, deservedly been a first-choice pick, but even he looked bereft of ideas yesterday. Werner needs time to regain confidence, N’Golo Kante needs to find the tenacity that made him such a mesmerising watch in central midfield when he arrived from Leicester City. And elsewhere, heads need knocking together so that concentration improves, and players start showing a bit of interest in what they’re doing. As on yesterday’s performance, that was in scant supply. And it’s precisely that sort of indifference that traditionally prompts Abramovich to look up Guus Hiddink to see if he’s got any plans for the next few months. 

A glimpse into the future...but for whom?

Twitter/Chelsea FC

In three weeks' time Antonio Conte could be collecting a FA Cup winner's medal from whomever Prince William deputises to the task while he's busy delivering the best man's speech at his brother's wedding. If Chelsea do beat Manchester United at Wembley on May 19 it will be a welcome reversal from last year's abject display against Arsenal in the same contest (one for which - without any bitterness at all... - I bought a ticket for myself and my best mate for his 50th birthday...), in which Conte's then-Premier League title winners forgot to turn up. Or, at least, they turned up with Victor Moses, who forgot what occasion he was playing in.

Some say Chelsea are cup specialists. There are those, too, who maintain that no other club in the modern era has made the FA Cup Final quite their own. In this regard, they have a point: in the competition's modern history Chelsea have won the cup seven times out of a total of 12 appearances. They won the last final at the old Wembley in 2000 and won it in the first final of the new stadium in 2007, beating Manchester United by a single Didier Drogba goal. For those of us who were there, this was sweet revenge for the humiliating 4-0 defeat by United in 1994 (even if that experience - which led to a European Cup Winners Cup run - somewhat marked the 'return' of Chelsea to the big time, having spent the 1970s and 1980s in a dark, financially ruinous an largely anonymous, success-wise, place).

Indeed, it would be three years later when the team, under Ruud Gullit's management, captained by Dennis Wise and peppered with internationals like Gianfranco Zola, Frank Leboeuf, Gianluca Vialli and Roberto Di Matteo (who famously scored after just 42 seconds), would beat Middlesborough 2-0 and win their first 'grown-up' silverware for a quarter of a century.

"Chelsea are back!" we sang, and they were. I won't bore you with all the stats that have followed, save to say that the FA Cup has been an ever-constant in much of the Abramovich era, a period that, yes, has seen Chelsea win the Premier League five times, but has also seen them win the Cup four times in the last 11 years. That, however, isn't the point of this post. Nor is the cycle of management - you know the drill: Chelsea hires head coach, wins a trophy or two, parts company with head coach, hires head coach, wins a trophy or two, parts company with head coach, repeat ad nauseam. Nope. Not this. Even if, surely, Conte's appearance with Chelsea at Wembley later this month will be his last in charge.

No. Because when Roman Abramovich assumed ownership of Chelsea, apart from wanting to turn it into London's AC Milan, he also gave instruction to his minions to create a successful academy system that would generate future stars for the club. On paper, at least, that hasn't happened. John Terry is, arguably, the last youth product to have achieved first team regularity (although, this season, Andreas Christensen could be considered to have broken through, tentatively). Looked at from a broader, historic perspective, the Chelsea academy hasn't been without longer lasting successes: Jimmy Greaves, Bobby Tambling, Peter Bonetti, Terry Venables, Ron Harris, John Hollins, Peter Osgood and Ray Wilkins all came through its system, along with more recent graduates like Terry, Ryan Bertrand and Robert Huth. However, the absence of sustained careers at the parent club remains a key issue for the current era. Perhaps it's not even the academy's mission? Perhaps generating new talent, who glimmer with prospect for first team appearances before being sold or loaned out is merely the business model, nothing more than a form of husbandry and a secondary process to first team recruitment? For fans this isn't without its frustration. Chelsea loaned out academy product Ruben Loftus-Cheek and replaced him - for £40 million - with the profoundly disappointing Tiémoué Bakayoko. There are many more examples.

Twitter/Chelsea FC

Which brings me - six paragraphs later - to events last night at the Emirates Stadium and the point of this post. Chelsea won their fifth consecutive FA Youth Cup, an achievement you have to go back to the Busby Babes of the 1950s to match. Thrashing Arsenal 7-1 on aggregate recorded the Chelsea Under-18s their seventh FA Youth Cup trophy in all since 2010. The feeling amongst football writers is that it is unlikely to be their last, either, and that a fifth consecutive trophy could easily become a sixth, seventh or more.

Imagine a first team recording such persistent success. They'd be regarded with the same superlative as Manchester United's dominance under Sir Alex Ferguson, or the modern Barcelona, or Liverpool in the late '70s and early '80s. And yet, when you think about it, seven years of success for a youth side should mean, applying basic mathematics, that there has been a steady flow of graduates into the Chelsea first team. The truth is, there hasn't been. Amongst the current crop, Callum Hudson-Odoi (who scored twice last night) has had a few runouts this season under Conte, during which he has looked a very exciting prospect, with lightning pace and an exceptional turn of foot. Others, like Dujon Sterling and Ethan Ampadu have also enjoyed the odd taste of the big time as substitutes. The $64,000 question is - what next? Will that be it?

Another key question is about the future of Jody Morris, the Under-18s manager. A Chelsea academy graduate himself, once a combative midfielder who came through the ranks alongside Terry and made 124 midfield appearances between 1996 and 2003, he has quietly got on with playing a huge part in the youth team's remarkable run of success since being appointed four years ago. While it might be highly unlikely that he would be considered an immediate replacement for Conte, should he leave (and with a predictable list of European exotica being lined up), surely a record like his won't go unnoticed?

All of which begs the more existential question about what is Chelsea's strategy when it comes to players and managers alike? To win five consecutive trophies suggests that the club is sitting on a gold mine in Morris and his players. No one, though, would be so naive to suggest that any of their success would translate instantly into the first team: but, all the same, it would be a tragedy to see that talent just ebb away to other clubs. I might be ludicrously idealistic, but why not get some of these youngsters blooded in properly at the top level, and see what raw, precocious talent can do? Alan Hansen's infamous statement in 1995 that "You can’t win anything with kids" has often been proven right, even if it was immediately proven wrong by Fergie's youngsters (Gary Neville, 20; Paul Scholes, 20; Ryan Giggs, 21; Phil Neville, 18; Nicky Butt, 20; and David Beckham, 20) going on to win that season's Premier League. The trouble is, is any club willing to give it another go now?

Take your seats please, you're here by royal appointment

© Simon Poulter 2018

I may have mentioned on this blog once or twice that I lived abroad for 17 years, and in that time I managed to maintain a season ticket at Stamford Bridge, albeit an arrangement which meant that Chelsea home games were restricted to weekend fixtures and the occasional bank holiday. In fact, over the course of those 17 years I chalked up just a single midweek match - a crucial fixture with Tottenham (well, usually, they are) that my boss at the time - who also happened to be a Chelsea season ticket holder - and I contrived we had to be at. Somehow “an urgent meeting in London” was convened.

Returning to London, I’ve been reacquainted with the rituals of the midweek fixture: leaving the office at just the right time, sans briefcase; shoving the Evening Standard into the exterior pocket of a coat; making do with a poor quality burger and a pint of Guinness for an evening meal; and at the actual stadium, adopting a wry smile at the site of young herberts wearing their best workplace suits and ties, instead of the yobwear they’d normally be in on a Saturday afternoon.

Most midweek games I’ve attended since being back in the UK have been for sundry cup ties, plus the occasional league game, but the visit by Atlético Madrid in the Champions League in December (I had to miss the October home time with Roma) whet the appetite for a brand new experience: European football. This may sound naive, given that, save for last season, Chelsea have played in Europe consistently over the last decade or so. But when I moved abroad in 1999 Chelsea had yet to commence the Abramovich-funded ascendancy that put them into the so-called European elite. 19 years ago, though, things were certainly on the up: FA Cup victory in 1997 and the arrival of European superstars like Ruud Gullitt, Gianfranco Zola and Gianluca Vialli were some indication of improvements, which is why I’d taken the plunge and bought a season ticket to begin with. But apart from a breathless foray into the Cup Winners' Cup (and a memorable away trip to Bruges) the idea of Chelsea playing the true royalty of Europe seemed beyond reality. The idea of Chelsea actually winning something seemed even more remote.

In my lifetime Chelsea had only won one major European title, the Cup Winners' Cup in 1971 (beating Real Madrid), before a period of financial instability and near bankruptcy in the late 70s and 80s, pinballing around the old First and Second Divisions. It’s why, when away fans sing "Where were you when you were shit?!" at Stamford Bridge, I always reply, "Here." The Cup Winners' Cup victory in 1998 - in which Zola came off the bench to score against VfB Stuttgart - still felt like an aberration. The Premier League victory in 2004 - 50 years since the club’s previous league title - felt overdue. Arrogant as it sounds, we've not looked back, domestically. But the European adventure has - and still - feels like something different.

The ‘Cup with the big ears’ has always had a special appeal. When Chelsea qualified for the Champions League for the first time in 1999, progressing to the quarter-finals to meet Barcelona (beating them 3–1 at Stamford Bridge only to be demolished 5-1 two weeks later) the notion of Chelsea playing the European elite was still somewhat unreal. It was only four years later, with the arrival of Roman Abramovich’s roubles, that it started to feel like the new normal. Over the first decade of Abramovich’s patronage, Chelsea were consistent qualifiers, even coming close to winning the thing. Who can forget the heartache of John Terry’s penalty slip against Manchester United in the Final held in Moscow’s Luzhniki Stadium in 2008. And the next season they were back, going as far as the semi-final where they met Barcelona again, drawing 0-0 in the first leg at Camp Nou, and then controversially conceding an equaliser at Stamford Bridge in the 94th minute of the second leg. Barça figured again in the unlikely run-in to Chelsea winning the Champions League in 2012, with another nervy semi-final in which, in the second leg, John Terry was sent off and the much-maligned Fernando Torres scored in injury time in the Catalan capital. By that stage, Chelsea were unbeaten in their previous four matches at Camp Nou, having drawn all of them, and Lionel Messi had failed to score against Chelsea in eight matches, the most games he had played against a single opponent without a goal - a record that still stands.

Which, then, brings me to tonight’s Round Of 16 first leg encounter at Stamford Bridge. Chelsea haven’t had a bad record against Barça, and some of it has been more overshadowed by refereeing controversy than football. But, like handling wild animals, nothing but the utmost respect must be applied. Not for nothing is Luis Valverde’s side where they are in La Liga, with - ominously - Messi on 27 goals in all competitions this season, 20 of which in the Spanish league where Barça currently have a seven-point league. Chelsea, on the other hand are…well…”recovering” from a disastrous January beset by defeats, injuries, suspensions and a manager in open conflict with his board over squad depth and the lack of transfer window signings. Psychologically, Conte has correctly played the underdog card ahead of tonight for his team - what else can you do against this opposition? - but there is still a concern that against a powerful and resurgent Barcelona, Chelsea’s noted defensive weaknesses and profligacy in front of goal will hurt them, regardless of how stable they are again after a well-earned break and something of a return to form.

Whatever the outcome (and I know I’m steeling myself for disappointment here), tonight’s experience will be like little else in football. To be seeing FC Barcelona in the flesh will be something to revere. I just hope it won’t be something to regret.

A Bridge too far?

Ever since André Villas-Boas was, apparently, set the impossible task of transforming from within a Chelsea dominated by its then José Mourinho spine of Čech, Terry, Lampard and Drogba, there's been a never-ceasing murmur about who would blink first in the battle of wills between the club and, in particular, its "Captain, Leader, Legend".

The conventional wisdom has been that John Terry - while beloved unconditionally by Chelsea fans - has been on an exit path ever since he turned 30, six years ago. That he hasn't left - and even had a resurgence, some managers later, under Mourinho - has only served his status as 'Mr. Chelsea'. But the reality has been, despite the mutual Mourinho-Terry dependency, that the defender's effectiveness has started to show its age.

Tomorrow night Chelsea's record breaking, medal-hoovering skipper will no doubt start in the FA Cup quarter-final at home to Manchester United. It's a tie rooted in so many histories, the most prominent being Mourinho's as, now, the United manager, but also the long memories we Chelsea fans all have of the humiliation by United in the 1994 FA Cup Final (never mention David Elleray's name around these parts...) and that night in Moscow when a slippery sod rendered Terry in tears and United the European Champions.

The sad truth is that if Chelsea lose, it could be the last competitive game we see Terry play at Stamford Bridge. And even if Chelsea go through to the semi-final and beyond, Terry's place in any starting line-up will be in doubt. To his absolute credit, Terry has accepted that this season his club captaincy has been more a job of seniority and moral support, dressing room continuity for Antonio Conte. There haven't been any complaints in the press about playing time, while his posts on Instagram have been of a dutiful player training relentlessly. "In the nicest way I hope I don’t get back in because it means we are carrying on winning matches," Terry told the Evening Standard in November. Last week Conte declared that Terry was important to him this season "because he's the captain and he's working very well on the pitch and helping me a lot in the changing room, transferring the right message".

The Italian is well aware of Terry's Chelsea legacy, but most Chelsea fans will, equally, be aware that the old soldier can't go on forever - even if, much like Monty Python's Black Knight of Holy Grail fame, he believes he can. This season's Premier League form with a largely Terry-free line-up has provided Chelsea fans with a convenient reason to not miss Terry. We might love the old slugger, of course, but with David Luiz's growing maturity, Cesar Azpiliqueta's quiet confidence, Gary Cahill finally looking not totally lost without JT at his side, and Kurt Zouma slowly working his way back from injury, no one has felt that Terry could offer anything more than being a figurehead with a penchant for taking a boot to the face when it is needed.

Still, though, the 36-year-old Terry believes he has a couple more seasons in him in the top flight before he hangs up his boots, much like his close friend Frank Lampard who has only just retired at 38. West Bromwich Albion and Bournemouth are believed to be interested in taking him on, Stoke are also rumoured to be keen, and having previously said, out of loyalty, he wouldn't play for a rival Premier League club, these are likely to be his options, should he not accept a coaching or ambassadorial role at Chelsea.

It would be a tough acceptance for Chelsea fans, but no more than seeing any beloved player in another team's shirt. There maybe a few more blue rings on the Terry treestump than when Chelsea sold on the much loved Juan Mata to United, even Nigel Spackman to Liverpool, many years ago when money was tight, but Terry deserves what he can get, even if at a rival, as much as Chelsea clearly need to complete the process begun this season of weaning itself of a club player since he was 14. It can be done, it probably needs to be done if, for once, we allow head to overrule heart.

Is this all just a little bit of history repeating?

David Price/Arsenal FC via Getty Images

​
Regular readers of my previous blog, What Would David Bowie Do? (retired on compassionate grounds in January), may have grown used to a recurring feature during the final third of last year: the Monday Moan.

This wasn't, I hasten to point out, some general-purpose weekly soapbox, but a cathartic outpouring in response to the increasing frustration of watching Chelsea defend their 2014-2015 Premier League title. Because, as you might remember, despite winning the thing on May 3 with three games to spare (and having effectively taken the title by the previous Christmas), just three months later they played Swansea at Stamford Bridge, and things went steadily downhill from there until José Mourinho ran out of excuses at the same time as he ran out of chances to turn it around. By the time he went "by mutual consent" on December 17, Chelsea were relegation zone-threatening deadbeats. Enter, once more, Uncle Guus to steady the ship. At that point I lost interest. Not in the club or its results - some things are ingrained genetically - but in caring.

Chelsea's worryingly demonstrable decline before our very eyes in a matter of weeks unmasked the truth that the club really wasn't equipped to move itself on, to progress and evolve. Mourinho was as stubborn as ever in sticking to his PowerPoint presentations and the opposition sussed Chelsea out in the knowledge that there was no Plan B. The club itself had abjectly failed to come up with the one or two marquee signings who can sometimes make all the difference. Thus, a squad already demoralised by the way their team doctor had been treated publicly by the coach descended into self-disbelief, lapsed concentration, capitulation and either an inability to kill games off on their own terms, or worse, prevent being killed off themselves.

So what has changed this season, and why the resurrection of the Monday Moan, if only for just this week? Because nothing has changed. Saturday's performance against Arsenal - a fixture in which Chelsea had been able to frustrate the opponent quite satisfyingly for seveal seasons - as well as that against Liverpool two Fridays before, demonstrated a team still lacking the mental strength to turn things around when under duress. That a club should look all at sea without a 35-year-old player is the biggest worry, given that they were actually prepared to lose John Terry permanently until the final hours of last season when, presumably, Chelsea capitulated and gave him a new contract.

But with JT out injured, it is frightening to see how disorganised at the back and toothless at the front they become. Branislav Ivanovic - no doubt a loyal servant - is still incredibly vulnerable (as he was a year ago), César Azpilicueta is still only a makeshift solution at left back (as he was a year ago), Gary Cahill looks clueless (as he has been since returning from England's disaster against Iceland...and indeed, as he was a year ago...) and David Luiz is... Well, let's just say that all the concerns about David Luiz have so far been borne out. Not for nothing, one wag on Twitter wrote on Saturday: "Gary Cahill and David Luiz is the worst central defence partnership since...Gary Cahill and David Luiz". Thibaut Courtois has, since usurping Petr Čech looked less convincing, and his clear angling last week for a move back to Madrid at the end of his current Chelsea contract will not - and has not - endear him to fans, especially those who haven't exactly seen an organising colossus in the Belgian. Personally, I think Asmir Begovic is as good and without the hype.

In front of this culendar of a defence should be sitting at least one glimmer of hope, N'Golo Kante. One of two summer signings to get excited about (Michy Batshuayi being the other), Kante has yet to fully demonstrate why his transfer from Leicester was the wrench Claudio Ranieri professed it to be. It is all about systems, of course, but with Antonio Conte not yet confident enough to adopt the preferred formations he honed in Italy, Kante has been shoe-horned into a Chelsea team which is, to all intents and purposes, that which kicked off the 2014-15 season, albeit with Nemanja Matic looking as ineffective now as he was highly effective then.

Defence is the obvious pain-point for Chelsea. Without Terry they look disorganised and frightened to get stuck in, and Cahill in particular, lost. Courtois' lack of communication doesn't help, either. Down the front, things are somewhat better, but only just. If Pedro being brought on is the solution to replace Hazard or Willian, then you know Chelsea are in trouble (though Hazard's lack of tracking back against Walcott on Saturday cruelly exposed Aspiliqueta). And Diego Costa's relentless pursuit of free kicks and yellow cards for opponents from disinterested referees is just boring and tiring to watch. Please, Antonio, get Diego goal-hanging and work on the supply. He's at least prepared to toil, so the goals will come.

Much of this angst is the result of things that could have been corrected. For two summer transfer windows in a row, Marina Granovskaia and Michael Emenalo have failed to deliver the transfer targets of either Mourinho and Conte (Kante was a make-do subsitute for players in Italy, while Luiz was an outright panic buy), and yet somehow the club can afford to loan out 39 - 39!!! - players deemed surplus to immediate needs. Presumably they know what they're doing: it's just a pity no one at Chelsea Football Club is prepared to talk to the media about what they're doing, so that the press, and therefore us fans (especially those paying to watch the team) can understand the philosophy and, if one exists, the strategy.

Antonio Conte, being the new boy and, notably, not Mourinho, has kept a tight lip over the inadequacies of what he's got to play with, but it's pretty clear what they are. Watching vast swathes of Chelsea defensive territory opened up by Arsenal was painful enough, but then watching Keystone Cops-like moments in the goalmouth against Leicester City and Liverpool was even worse. Whatever Conte does now, he needs to be decisive, and perhaps more than he's been. Chelsea are at present a system looking for a team. OK, so the players Conte wanted aren't there, but on paper, at least, this is a squad that should be putting up a fight, at least more than they did in that squalid 90 minutes on Saturday against Arsenal.

Behind blue eyes

It may only have been a couple of weeks ago - and it was - that we bade farewell to the last football season with the somewhat anti-climactic final of Euro 2016, but even at the indecent hour of 5am this morning it felt like the new one was already underway.

Of course, the 2016-17 season proper doesn't start for another couple of weeks (Scotland, the Football League, Community Shield, et al, with the Premier League on August 13), but the intensity of this morning's/last night's apparent friendly in California between Chelsea and Liverpool provided a more revealing insight into what we can expect from Antonio Conte, in particular, and indeed Jürgen Klopp in his first full season at Anfield.

Chelsea's pre-season PR machine has certainly been keen to show off Conte's high-tempo, intensive training techniques, with videos and press images of players working on fitness and body strength with positively medieval-looking giant elastic bands, medicine balls and other gizmos that those in the know claim to be highly innovative.

Last week's friendlies in Austria were more boot camps than anything serious, a first opportunity for the Italian to run the rule over most of his squad (some who'd been in teams progressing late into Euro 2016 were excused to finish up their holidays). But this week's American tour under the auspices of the "International Champions Cup" - a four-way tournament involving the two English clubs, Real Madrid and AC Milan - looks like being a far more competitive affair. The all-Premier League tie at the Pasadena Rose Bowl was certainly uncompromising, with Cesc Fàbregas doing little to impress Conte by earning a straight red card for a sloppy studs-up encounter with Ragnar Klavan's ankle, and Liverpool picking up five bookings.

In principle, though, no one should be too excited by the result - 1-0 to Chelsea after a tenth-minute Gary Cahill header. As we are drilled to say, "pre-season friendlies don't matter". Well, at least that's how we responded to last summer's disastrous preparation, which included a humiliating 4-2 defeat to a significantly second-string New York Red Bulls team, adding to the precipitation of José Mourinho's mood and the entire team's season-long malaise.

But there was an exciting intensity to the Liverpool game of a kind that you would normally expect from these two teams meeting on a November afternoon in West London. And if that was the image that Conte, in particular, wanted to put across, both to fans and his new bosses, then he probably succeeded. In return, we got to see a steely Chelsea, and the Conte passion we were all thrilled by during the Euros, somewhat sweatily being played out on the Rose Bowl's touchline.

Twitter/Chelsea FC

Mental strength and physical stamina were, arguably, Chelsea's undoing last season, with the former most prevalent as the Mourinho cloud grew ever-darker, and the team going on to lose 12 games and concede 53 goals. What will certainly please Conte will be his defence, which last night comprised of Cesar Azpiliqueta, Gary Cahill, 19-year-old Londoner Ola Aina, and John Terry. Yes, the Terry who only re-signed for the club as the hours ticked down to his contract expiring at the end of May. Klopp was certainly impressed by the opposition his forwards came up against: "When a team with the quality of Chelsea defends so deep then every team in the world will have a little problem," he told the Liverpool FC website.

Terry, in particular, deserves credit for his performance against Liverpool. It wasn't necessarily spectacular - the game itself wasn't - or perfect (he is, let's be honest, beyond that now), but his application and fitness over this and the other pre-season games have shown what an inspirational captain he still is. 90 minutes for a 35-year-old in searing Californian heat should not be sniffe at. Not for nothing has he been putting in the hours to demonstrate his indispensability - and captaincy - to Conte, even with the club still looking for another centre-back (Napoli's Koulibaly an expensive possibility), and Kurt Zouma soon to return from long-term injury.

While Chelsea's high-profile signing N'Golo Kante is being spared the pre-season program following France's run to the Euro 2016 final, Michy Batshuayi's introduction two-thirds into the game provided another showcase of his potential. Same goes for Juan Cuadrado, whom Conte is determined to hang on to after an impressive loan spell at Juve. All that said, the core of Conte's team against Liverpool was from the Mourinho squad, with Willian, Traore and Loftus-Cheek looking sharp in attack, along with former loanee Victor Moses, who has been impressing in pre-season, as has Nemanja Matic, after his indifferent form last term.

With Hazard back to his best, and Diego Costa's head (and fitness) being mostly in the right place, regardless of new distractions from Madrid, there is a palpable sense - to use a phrase - that the Conte regime is already drawing a line under Chelsea's dismal championship defence, one which saw them flirt dangerously - and realistically - with the relegation zone until Guus Hiddink steadied the ship.

Twitter/Chelsea FC

It's easy, simplistic even, to become giddy during pre-season, with new players, the sunshine of a summer tour, and even a bright, shiny new kit to give everything a freshness. Conte, especially, is well into his Chelsea honeymoon, one gilded by such an electric run with Italy in the Euros. But with the forthcoming challenge of Mourinho's Manchester United and Guardiola's Manchester City, along with Liverpool, Spurs and, of course, defending title winners Leicester, honeymoons do come to an end early in football. But for now, it's nice to bask in the glow of a very bright start.

Captain, leader, legend, leaving?

Last week, the Daily Telegraph's Jason Burt put forward the interesting theory that John Terry could end his Chelsea career immediately, rather than next season, to prevent any one manager being seen to be responsible for drawing the curtain on one of the most enduring relationships between a football club, it's fans and a player in recent times. By not offering the centre half another 12-month contract extension, Burt suggested, the club would ensure that incoming head coach Antonio Conte wouldn't have to deal with Terry's departure - after 18 years as a professional at the club - on his watch. And, with Guus Hiddink only in charge for one more game before his interim term ends tomorrow, better that Terry goes now without anyone being left to blame.

Burt's hypothesis may well prove unfounded if Terry accepts the one-year contract extension which, surprisingly, the club yesterday announced it had offered the fan-anointed "Captain, Leader, Legend". The news came after months of silence from the club (not surprising, given its shocking record of transparency) - and, of course, Terry may yet decline it. In a post on Instagram, the defender said: "The contract extension the club has offered me is a different role and I hope everyone will understand I want to take the time to consider it carefully before making a decision."

Quite what makes this role different is not yet clear, though presumably the club is not asking him to take over one of the burger concessions in the East Stand lower concourse. The Times today claims that the "different role" is simply a pay cut and no guarantees of being a first-team starter next season. Still, though, for the player to make such a personal statement like that suggests that there is froideur from a player having to consider a diminished position in exchange for remaining a professional player for a 19th year at Chelsea.

It is understood that Terry met with Chelsea executive Marina Granovskaia and chairman Bruce Buck earlier this week. The last time they all met was back in January, for Terry's "need to know" meeting, an attempt to establish if, per club policy of only offering one-year contracts to players over 30, that he would receive another extension to his. The news - Terry announced, apparently unilaterally, was that there wouldn't be a new contract and that he'd be leaving at the end of the season. "It’s not going to be a fairytale ending, I’m not going to retire at Chelsea," he emotionally announced after Chelsea's 5-1 FA Cup at MK Dons.

Holding the whip hand of his own PR, Terry added: "I’m going to be playing out my career elsewhere, which it took me a couple of days to get over", underlining that his dedication to Chelsea wouldn't change as his career there drew down: "I want to give everything and finish on a high, on 100% good terms with the club". 

However, despite making a clear point about departures, Terry did say that "things might change" though he qualified that by adding "but it’s a 'no' at the minute." Now, though, it is a 'yes...but'. In the intervening period it has seemed as if everyone connected with the club has been walking on large, pterodactyl-sized eggshells over Terry's future. Even after Terry had made his statement in January, the club's own announcement wasn't exactly convincing: "The club has the utmost respect for John and everything he has helped us achieve to date. He is a fantastic servant to Chelsea and a superb captain. As such, the club will keep the channels of dialogue open."

For many seasons that fantastic servitude has been reflected by the "JT - Captain, Leader, Legend" banner, hung on the separation of the lower and upper tiers of Stamford Bridge's Mathew Harding Stand. This screen-printed strip is, of course, wonderful footballing hyperbole - not least that it has been tolerated by the club and not replaced by lucrative advertising. But it has been a distinctive totem of the John Terry cult at Chelsea, one that has fuelled the belief that this last product of Chelsea's youth programme to become a first team regular has had some sort of invincible power at and even over the club.

He has certainly had that effect over the fans, whose devotion has become emboldened, despite the self-styled 'Mr. Chelsea's well publicised transgressions off-field and, in the case of the ugly spat with Anton Ferdinand, on-field. No one, least of all me, will deny that Terry has cultivated a far from spotless image, from the drunken japes at a Heathrow hotel after 9/11, to his relationship with former teammate Wayne Bridge's ex-girlfriend, to repeated parking his Range Rover in disabled bays. And when he hasn't had time to court more controversy himself, members of his family have stepped in to help out. Chelsea, to its credit, have stood by him, especially during the allegations of racially abusing Anton Ferdinand during an away fixture at QPR in October 2011.

John Terry has been with Chelsea since he was 14 years old and has played, to date, 703 senior games for the club, more than 500 as skipper since José Mourinho installed him in the role 12 years ago. His influence within the club has been immense, which makes yesterday's announcement - and Terry's somewhat muted response - all the more indicative of a relationship under strain. If Terry does reject the new offer, he will have played his last game for the club, having been suspended for Wednesday's fixture at Anfield and tomorrow's final game of the season at home to champions Leicester.

© Simon Poulter 2016

If, then, he does leave, it is believed that Chelsea will host a private sendoff for him at Stamford Bridge on Monday. Still, though, following the anti-climactic departures of Frank Lampard, Petr Čech, Ashley Cole and Didier Drogba - arguably the core of Mourinho's successes at the club - the lack of any vocal commitment by Chelsea to resolving Terry's contract has been seen by fans as a slap in the face to the player who has been the hub of that core.

Hiddink, ever the pacifier, has said that the delay in taking any action over Terry hasn't been out of any malice: "People who are making the decisions want to take their time. That's up to them," the diplomatic interim coach as said. "That doesn't mean there's dramatic, bad treatment so far, but everyone has his own approach to deal with this matter," sidestepping anything more controversial by adding: "What the near future is is up to the club, it's not for me to make declarations on that."

Eggshells left untrampled upon. The heart of the matter, however, is clearly in the realm of what Jason Burt was hinting at. Antonio Conte is going to want to stamp his own signature on a team that is in desperate need of rebuilding. Deadwood, like Oscar, needs to be released, with a new group of players built around the revitalised Eden Hazard and, perhaps, Diego Costa. And while Terry himself believes that, at 35 (36 in December), he still has another couple of years left at Premier League level, there has been no shortage of evidence that age is catching up with him.

Where Chelsea do clearly need Terry still, however, is as the fearless leader he has been for more than 500 league appearances. Gary Cahill, too, has looked better playing alongside him, and Kurt Zouma, before his season-ending injury, was brought considerably by playing with him.

What Terry has lacked, clearly, in terms of pace he has always compensated for by easily being one of the best central defenders in a generation. However, as any player in the upper reaches of their careers find, the trouble is always when to quit, or at least (and this may well be the case with Terry) accept a reduced or lesser role. The question is exactly what that role will be. 

There will, no doubt be a job for Terry at Chelsea when he does retire - something, he said in January, which has been discussed ("my legacy") - but between his possible future appointment as a coach or even youth team manager and now there must still be a gap. And that will fuel the internal dialogue John Terry will now be having on whatever offer Chelsea have made. 

So if, after all, it is simply not the offer he wanted, he will be stoic. "The club will move on. No player is ever bigger than the club," he said earlier this year, believing that Chelsea was "moving in a different direction". "I want to come back as a Chelsea supporter in years to come with my kids and see the team doing really well. Unfortunately that’s not going to be with me but I want to see the team do well. It’s going to be my last year and I want to go out at the top."

Outside the Chelsea fanbase, there will be plenty of people who will be glad to see the back of John Terry. But if he does leave the club that took him on as a teenager and turned him in to one of the finest central defenders - and, indeed, skippers - of his generation, I would hope that footballing purists will allow themselves to appreciate the qualities that generated such a reputation, qualities that helped Chelsea - during his time at the club - to four Premier League titles, three League Cups; five FA Cups, a Europa League title and - although he missed the 2012 final due to suspension - the European Cup itself.

And if he has played his last game for the club - the defeat to Sunderland in which he earned a red card and a two match suspension (a "fitting end", the nasty and unwarranted comment of one Sunday Times journalist last Saturday...) - the legacy John Terry seeks from Chelsea will be immense. As will be the gaping hole he'll leave. Chelsea will no doubt add to their ranks of central defenders (yes, those panic buys in last summer's transfer window), and they may even land John Stones, identified by Mourinho as Terry's potential successor. But one thing is certain: if Terry does walk away from the club now, it is unlikely that they will find anyone to truly backfill the vacancy created. Because in the club's long history - yes, haters, that word - there will only ever be a Captain, Leader and Legend like John Terry.

Arrested development

Of course it was all down to me. My first visit to Stamford Bridge since Christmas, and Chelsea pummel Newcastle United 5-1, the game largely won within the first 18 minutes via three goals that left the visitors shell-shocked. Clearly, my presence was the only explanation for Chelsea suddenly putting in a ruthless performance. At last.

The truth of the matter, however, is that Chelsea's performance yesterday was the result of one single, even straightforward improvement: confidence. Tactics, positioning and all that good stuff played their part, but as I spent most of the four months between August 8 and José Mourinho's sacking telling anyone who'd listen, Chelsea's problems were all psychological. They were simply broken on the inside. Yesterday they looked anything but. Incredible what a difference Guus Hiddink has made with just a lighter touch.

However, we should avoid too much excitement. Hiddink has merely arrested the relegation form. Chelsea are, today, 12th in the Premier League, as opposed to 16th when Mourinho was sacked. Victory over Newcastle was Hiddink's first league home win since taking over (the 3-1 result on December 19 could hardly be chalked up to the Dutchman, coming just two days after being appointed). But while this may sound ungrateful - it's not - the confidence Hiddink has instilled in his browbeaten and previously disinterested players will surely bode well for at least an FA Cup run and, who knows, the unlikely turnover of PSG in the Champions League.

Pleasing as it was to see a blistering win by Chelsea from my own season ticketed seat, the realist - some might say cynic - in me knows that Hiddink's task is merely one of brief containment. Any absence from Europe next season will surely herald an exodus in the summer. Diego Costa will undoubtedly return to Atletico Madrid, Eden Hazard will get to realise his ambition of playing for Real Madrid (unless PSG come in for him), John Terry will probably kick his last for Chelsea against Leicester City on the final day of the season, and others, like Willian, Courtois and Oscar, will probably get itchy feet themselves ahead of a new manager coming in.

And perhaps that is for the best. With 34 or so players of every discipline out on loan, and one of the most successful youth squads continuing to add to their trophy haul, surely even the most bizarre transfer policy at Chelsea must recognise that a generationally-rare opportunity to rebuild with young talent presents itself next season.

The question is how prepared Roman Abramovich and his lickspittle board are to let the Chelsea field lie fallow for a season. No Europe means no Champions League TV windfall, which means a relatively lean year with which to reduce the club's debt. And then there's the matter of a new manager. Who, of Europe and Latin America's potentially available elite coaches will be prepared to come in, work with a fresh young squad without the attraction of Champions League football?

A Manuel Pellegrini or a Mark Hughes might, but it's unlikely either will figure in the frame of reference of the Chelsea board, especially one whose ambition to find a replacement striker extends only as far as buying a crocked Alexandre Pato to cover for an even more crocked Radamel Falcao, who in turn was desperately intended to fill the gap left by Fernando Torres. See what I'm saying here? 

One sometimes wonders whether those in charge of talent acquisition at Chelsea really know what football is about at all, given some of the names that have come in only to be forgotten. So it doesn't bode well for the next choice of manager...unless, having been thwarted repeatedly in his attempts to sign Pep Guardiola, Roman Abramovich goes all out to land Mauricio Pochettino, who would be the best option for bringing a squad of youngsters up to European prowess.

Whatever happens, let's just agree that Chelsea today may have improved from the form they were in back in December, and they may well push on in at least the FA Cup. But they do, slightly, flatter to deceive. Against MK Dons in the cup two weeks ago they could have - actually, they should have - won by ten goals or more. The scoreline that afternoon ended 5-1, as did yesterday's. A useful reminder that progress and improvement, when you've been as deep in despair as Chelsea were, is still only relative.

The Pep in the Premier League's step that it needed

I am experiencing both dread and delight by this week's not-exactly unexpected news that Pep Guardiola will become Manchester City's new manager.

The dread comes from the fact that a patent talent - a Jamie Vardy or a John Stones - on the shopping lists of the big clubs, is more likely to want to play for the celebrated Catalan than opt for the managerial uncertainty and dysfunction at either Manchester United or Chelsea. Or the truly odd world that is Arsenal, who, once again, have started a season with all of the usual "This is our year!" and "We're better placed now than ever to win the league!" before it all starts to fade away in January. All of which means sloppy seconds elsewhere. OK, those are the breaks.

The delight, however, is the prospect of arguably the world's greatest club coach, currently, applying himself in the Premier League and bringing to it a pedigree that has netted, by the age of 44, 14 trophies in four years at Barcelona, including three Spanish league titles and the Champions League twice, and two Bundesliga championships with Bayern Munich in the course of his two full seasons at the club. That's beyond Mourinho form, and without the antics. Or the third season syndrome.

The Premier League will be, though, a very different beast to La Liga and its German counterpart. I don't say that out of arrogance, but just as players have been lured to England by the money and prestige of the league, they've also struggled or at least initially laboured to adapt to its speed and physicality.

Guardiola may be a master of innovation and guile, but he should not expect to have it all his own way, any more so than City, with Sheikh Mansoor's money, have done under Roberto Mancini and Manuel Pellegrini. But given the scale of Guardiola's proven ability, and the transfer budget that will be at his disposal, it's entirely possible that the once less-fashionable Manchester club could become the greatest in Premier League history, eclipsing their city rival in wealth and superlative, though not necessarily, one suspects, in heritage and status. But, then, that's the problem for United, as it has been for Liverpool. You were great, but what now?

Alright, this may be a little over the top. City have been there before, with preposterous, Galactico-sized spending that has still only netted the two Premier League titles since the Abu Dhabi United Group took over the club eight years ago. And it still hasn't won anything in Europe since the 1970 Cup Winners Cup.

We shouldn't, either, fall victim to creating a deity out of Guardiola. There's no doubt that he has set the bar high for exciting football and for applying an intelligent, cultured approach to football management. But even with the money, the existing squad and the potential for reinforcements, we should be cautious about installing Guardiola as a nailed-on cert.

That said, I have liked what Manchester City have done over recent seasons. It's hard for me to take a queasy stance over their monied resurgence, given that my own club has, too, benefited from the questionable largesse of an oligarch. But their arrival as a fourth big player, not to mention the somewhat satisfying sight of Manchester United's hubris being brought down a peg or two, has made the league infinitely more interesting.

There's little doubting that Guardiola will elevate City to another level, but credit should be given to Manuel Pellegrini, who is, in essence, a good manager, blessedly lacking in the histrionics of certain others, and who has acted with supreme dignity while the club has openly courted the younger Spaniard.

Though two different characters, there have been strong parallels between the Chilean and Claudio Ranieri's "dead man walking" period at Chelsea. Ironic, then, that both Pellegrini and Ranieri have been mentioned as candidates for the vacant job at Stamford Bridge.

Which is what makes Pellegrini a very interesting and unexpected candidate for Chelsea, or even the surely-soon-to-open vacancy at Old Trafford. In theory he could walk into the job at United (as would any manager given the opportunity - viz D. Moyes). But while Chelsea have been considering the likes of Antonio Conte and Diego Simeone - unproven, both, in the Premier League, and with no guarantee that they'd fit - as well as Mark Hughes and Ranieri, Pellegrini would bring Chelsea the experience of managing a big club with big expectations of quick success.

Pellegrini also possesses the sort of personality that Abramovich would like. He is without doubt a top manager, but unlike his former rival José Mourinho and all the manias that came with him, Pellegrini has demonstrated a knack for just getting on with things. Not for nothing has City been challenging for the title or fending off challengers under this refreshing character.

And what of now? Dignity personified, as he continues to compete for four titles whilst knowing for certain that his time in charge at the Etihad is drawing to a close. In spite of City's capricious managerial policy, Pellegrini came to Manchester with a very decent managerial record, from South America and then in Spain (look at his Villareal stats and then against Guardiola's Barcelona when in charge of Real Madrid). Even if this season, in which all the so-called big clubs have shown intermittent desire to win the Premier League, Pellegrini's ethos has been one that would also fit Chelsea's ambition for style of play and a style of success (on Premier League history alone, his win rate is third, behind Mourinho and Alex Ferguson).

At 62, and not, for example, the insane 34 years André Villas-Boas was when appointed to effectively restructure the Chelsea dressing room, Pellegrini would be the safe pair of hands that the club will need to pick up in the wake of John Terry's departure and following the restorative effect of Guus Hiddink, who will be 70 in November and unlikely to want to remain in club management for the long term. Moreover, Pellegrini would be charged with rebuilding Chelsea, possibly without European football next season, which is unlikely to bother his apparent lack of ego.

Yes, it may well take a fallow year for Chelsea to re-emerge with youth on its side, with the wealth of it in the current squad and, ridiculously, out on loan, exceptional quality like Dominic Solanke, Ruben Loftus-Cheek and the Brazilian Kenedy, all of which could build something very special indeed for the '17-18 season.

But back to Guardiola, sort of. With just under four full months of the season to go, Manchester City under Pellegrini still have plenty to deliver. Chelsea, under Hiddink, still have damage to repair and confidence to restore, with an exiting captain to maintain too. Manchester United need to do something to retore their status as the biggest club in the world and not a running joke. Arsenal need to give themselves a kick up the...er...Arsène and deliver on the false dawns they so unfuratingly - even for a Chelsea fan! - keep serving up. Liverpool need to calm down and settle under the delightfully eccentric Jurgen Klopp. And Leicester City? They just need to win the damn thing and put a smile on all of our faces.

Because next season will be a very different animal, with a Premier League "starring" a manager who has been coveted by more clubs than anyone in the history of the sport, who will be paid more than any manager in the history of the sport, and who will have more expectation placed on him than anyone in the history of the sport. And that means I can't wait for August.

For sale: one used Captain, Leader and Legend

For different reasons, and with varying degrees of emotion, yesterday became the day of two Terrys. In the morning, news that the broadcasting legend Terry Wogan had died, ending a 50-year radio and television career characterised by unparalleled wit, intelligence, charm and endearing self-awareness.

By the evening, it was news that John Terry, the most successful captain in Chelsea Football Club history and certainly the club's most successful homegrown talent in two decades, would be leaving at the end of the season after failing to secure a follow-on contract into his 36th year.

For the reasons we all know and don't require repeating, the contrast between these two people with Terry in their name couldn't be greater. But there is - or was - at least a common thread of loyalty. In the case of the footballer, there is mixed opinion, however, as to why Chelsea should extend his contract.

The club has made its position clear on over-30s, that they receive one-year extensions and no more, and ever since Roman Abramovic installed Andre Villas-Boas as manager in 2011, it was clear that the club wanted to ease out the old guard, players who, perhaps, had an unduly heavy influence over the dressing room.

JT has never been in posession of the fastest legs in football, and there's little requirement to point out the frailties that have been a part - though hardly responsible for - Chelsea's travails this season, but that is not the point. Terry may have been a dominant figure in the dressing room, but you got more than just a challenge to authority - you got the "Captain, Leader, Legend" so prominently proclaimed by the club's own banner strung across the tier divide of the Matthew Harding Stand.

To look at Chelsea's apparent reluctance - so far - to offer Terry a new contact is to look squarely through the restricting prism of the business mechanics of football. And, before we get on to the romance of football, which continues to overwhelmingly drive the sport - after all, isn't that what this weekend's FA Cup has been all about? - business mechanics have seen Chelsea sign players like Fernando Torres five years ago, Radamel Falcao last summer, and, now, Alexandre Pato - crocked strikers who continued to be a waste of money and the club's energy. And yet, with his lack of speed and public status as football's least-loved player outside of Stamford Bridge, John Terry continues to put more into the club than Torres, Falcao and Pato together ever would.

Before we get too carried away, however, the news of Terry's departure was just a statement he made himself, and may yet have been another act of emotional blackmail to bring Chelsea to its senses. The club have also issued a statement of their own today casting some ambiguity on the situation, to the effect of saying that Terry hasn't left yet, and things are still open.

John Terry has been an ever-present throughout the most successful period of Chelsea's history. You can easily question the ethics and morals behind Roman Abramovic's acquisition of the funds that have helped Chelsea to this success, but ask any supporter whether or not they'd go back to the ever-present threat of bankruptcy, of moribund seasons yo-yoing between the old first and second divisions, and even the old third division that once loomed ominously Chelsea. Yes, opposition fans, we do have history and, yes, I know exactly where I was when we were shit. Stamford Bridge. The answer will always be the same: we'd rather be where we are right now (well, a little higher in the Premier League, of course).

We all know those clichés about no player being bigger than the club, and that no player can go on forever. Terry probably believes that he can, but that is only symptomatic of the indestructable self belief that has regularly put his own head between a boot or a ball and the Chelsea goalmouth. What is truly sad, however, is that a club with 33 players out on loan (and probably more by midnight tonight) seems to have such an erratic player policy that it doesn't see the retinual value that Terry's huge presence in the squad can bring, especially to the younger players the club absolutely has to bring through.

Whether he has, as has been suggested, demanded a guarantee that he will be a future manager, he not only possesses a heritage beneficial to the players around him, but has a clear pedigree as a leader on the pitch. This leadership has diminished somewhat by the erosion of the spine that saw Petr Čech at is base, and then Terry, Frank Lampard, and Didier Drogba at its top, but the skipper continues to be an almighty presence on the pitch, in the dressing room and at the training ground.

© Simon Poulter 2015

"It's not going to be a fairytale ending," Terry said yesterday as he announced the ending of an 18-year run in the first team, which saw him replace no less a figure than Marcel Desailly and, as still a teenager, be bossing around more senior, more experienced figures with the authority and respect of a veteran. That was John Terry in 1998, and it's still not far off the John Terry of 2016.

So, is Chelsea making an almighty blunder, if indeed Terry does leave? Well, yes. Of course, much will depend on the incoming manager in the summer (assuming Guus Hiddink doesn't get permission from Mevrouw Hiddink to stay on). Given the range of options being rumoured - from old boys Mark Hughes and Didier Deschamps, Tottenham's Mauricio Pochettino and Antonio Conte, to Diego Simeone and even Claudio Ranieri - a new manager might not want Terry at all. Hopefully, any new manager will want to focus on the prodigious young talent Chelsea has floating about Europe, some in the squad, most out on loan.

But that should not mean that John Terry can't, shouldn't or wouldn't have a playing role at the club until the day really dawns when he has to pack it all up and become a coach. Kurt Zouma is learning more by playing alongside Terry in central defence than he would at any other club. Even Gary Cahill looks better when he has JT at his side. And New Jersey-born Matt Miazga - who signed for the club last Friday, somewhat suspiciously, too, given the timing of yesterday's news - could well be groomed to be Terry's successor by having Terry himself present to nurture him.

The upshot of this is that Chelsea still appear to be chronically naive and out of touch when it comes to what makes the club tick from its emotional centre. It should never have allowed Lampard or Drogba to go and, given the pounds it has wasted over the years on too many bad acquisitions to name here, it could easily have broken the bank to keep legends like these for the team's enduring benefit.

People like to pour scorn on the populist view that 'lifers' - the Gerrards, Giggs, Le Tissiers and Terrys of this world - are anachronisms, that football has long since moved on from being the community hub that made stars of local talent and built them from apprenticeship to retirement and beyond. And, yes, Terry - like Gerrard - has been tempted before by another club's silver, but they've been persuaded otherwise (or given in to fan power) and remained to be loved at the clubs they'd chosen to be associated with for all or most of their careers.

That is a powerful draw, but one which Chelsea's higher ups have regularly failed to recognise. Given that John Terry was the last homegrown talent to make a successful career in the first team - and that breakthrough was almost two decades ago - the myriad young players the club has now, winning title after title at Under-18 and Under-21 level, or farmed out to the four corners of Europe where, inevitably, the persist in being equally as successful - retaining Terry to help maximise these investments should be the business sense that Chelsea's executive management should appreciate.

It was then ironic that yesterday of all days Michael Emenalo, Chelsea's somewhat anonymous director of football and the man responsible for youth development and partially responsible for transfers, should appear for the first time on Twitter. Given the level of venting on Twitter over the Terry news, Emenalo is a brave man. It was he who went on Chelsea TV to talk of the "palpable" rift between José Mourinho and the players (which, given Guus Hiddink's obvious restoration of team confidence does seem viable).

But one wonders what role he has with the exhaustive husbanding of young players who end up on loan, while not being given a chance to breakthrough and create an exciting new dynasty of players at Chelsea. After all, John Terry was once given his chance - why shouldn't he be still there to do the same for another ambitious 18-year-old?