Timing and luck: there is more to Graham Potter’s strife than a lack of passion

H e’s not good enough. He’s not cut out for this level. He can’t handle the club. He’s out of his depth. It is never hard to propose simple explanations for why things have gone wrong for managers. But football is rarely simple. Everything is contingent; very little is true in itself. There is no simple explanation for Graham Potter’s struggles at Chelsea.

And these are struggles, even before you consider expenditure in excess of half a billion pounds over the past year. Chelsea started the weekend as close to the relegation zone as the Champions League qualification places. They are averaging a goal a game. They haven’t beaten a top-half side this season. They haven’t won a domestic cup tie and trail Borussia Dortmund after one leg in the Champions League last 16. And yet before Sunday’s game against Tottenham, Potter’s job is apparently not under threat.

Potter, we are told, isn’t angry enough. It’s a criticism that began with Danny Murphy on Match of the Day (although he was referring specifically to Potter’s reaction to Tomas Soucek blocking a goal-bound shot with his hand) and has spread despite Gary Lineker immediately pointing out how perpetually angry Murphy appears. Should all managers be as angry as Murphy? Was Nathan Jones too angry? Could mild-mannered managers perhaps bring in Murphy as an anger consultant? What is Murphy really angry about?

Ah, but Chelsea are an angry club – so angry Potter has received death threats from enraged fans. Anger is the Chelsea way. All Chelsea managers are angry. Apart, that is, from Carlo Ancelotti, who won them the Double. And Roberto Di Matteo, who won them the Champions League. And Guus Hiddink and Rafa Benítez, who salvaged sinking campaigns.

Which has led to the absurd