A spectre is haunting Europe's top football managers -- the spectre of Jurgen Klopp.
The German phenomenon's availability means his ghostly, toothy grin can be seen lurking in the background whenever any big team is said to be considering a change. But fromMarseille to Mexico, many have tried and failed to coax Klopp to abandon his sabbatical.
A move to England, it seems, is his aim. Recently, Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers had to endure rumours about Klopp; sources close to Klopp made it public knowledge thattaking over at Liverpool would be appealing.
After Arsenal's disastrous home defeat to Olympiakos in the Champions League group stage on Tuesday night, Klopp's name has inevitably been invoked by many Gunners supporters aiming for change at Emirates Stadium.
It is an illuminating thought: Would Arsenal actually be better off with Klopp than current manager Arsene Wenger, as Morgan and others suggest? Is reliable and profitable mediocrity in the Premier League and Champions League a compelling enough case to keep Wenger, or would it be worth taking a risk in pursuit of greater ambition? Wenger's supporters often demand the name of a manager who could do a better job. Is Klopp that man?
Appointing a coach with no experience in the Premier League would undoubtedly carry some risk, but Klopp has been auditioning for a job in England for some time, courting media admirers in press conferences before and after European matches against Premier League teams.
As he flirtatiously told BT Sport prior to a Champions League match against Arsenal last November: "I think [England is] the only country where I should work, next to Germany, because it's the only country I know the language a little bit and I need the language for my work. If somebody will call me, then we will talk about it."
Acclimatisation would not be much of a problem. Klopp even describes his preferred style of football as "English," saying prior to another Champions League match against Arsenal in 2013: "I don't like winning with 80 percent [of possession]. Sorry, that is not enough for me. Fighting football, not serenity football, that is what I like. What we call in German, 'English' [is a] rainy day, heavy pitch, 5-5, everybody is dirty in the face and goes home and cannot play for weeks after."
This is a stylistic difference that separates him from Wenger. As Klopp memorably said of his cultural clash with the Frenchman in the same interview: "He likes having the ball, playing football, passes ... it's like an orchestra. But it is a silent song. I like heavy metal more."
This is perhaps the biggest hurdle when it comes to anointing Klopp as Wenger's successor: The fact that he could dismantle the aesthetic the current incumbent has so carefully constructed over nearly two decades on the job. While the persistent cliché -- that Arsenal always try to walk it in -- is no longer true, not when Alexis Sanchez is thumping them in from range and Theo Walcott is sprinting in behind the defence to score, the two managers certainly embody different approaches.
But if it clashes with Wenger's current conception of the game, Klopp's rock-and-roll counterattacking would hardly be a betrayal of Arsenal's best traditions. The 1997-98 title winners, with Marc Overmars and Nicolas Anelka racing onto passes from Dennis Bergkamp and Patrick Vieira, made the counterattack into an art form. The subsequent additions of Freddie Ljungberg, Robert Pires and Thierry Henry elevated it further.
These days, Arsenal's game has evolved, and the club are just as likely to be caught out by a cleverly constructed counterattack than to score on the counter themselves. In our parallel universe, Klopp might even be able to restore an element of lost identity.
Klopp wouldn't even necessarily be a threat to the gargantuan cash reserves of majority shareholder Stan Kroenke. At Borussia Dortmund, Klopp worked on a far smaller budget than his rivals at Bayern Munich but still managed to beat them to the Bundesliga title in both 2011 and 2012.
An ability to outmanoeuvre richer institutions is even more imperative in the billionaires' playground of the Premier League and given the scaling back of financial fair play. Wenger kept Arsenal in touch during the lean years imposed by the move to Emirates Stadium, which is a fantastic achievement that arguably does not get the recognition it deserves. Still, they have not been a realistic contender for the title since 2008, and the opening day defeat to West Ham this season suggested nothing will change under Wenger anytime soon.
However, putting aside fantasy for a moment, there is no serious prospect of Arsenal changing managers because Wenger is perfect for Kroenke. Wenger won't cause issues to sign new players, even with around £200 million sitting in the bank, and he gets the team into the Champions League every season, keeping a key income stream secure.
Arsenal will not take a risk on Klopp, not when consistent profit appears to be more of a priority than making a genuine challenge at home and abroad. The fact that Arsenal bought only one player in the summer, Petr Cech, and then rested him to disastrous effect in a crucial Champions League match says everything about the limits to their ambition.
The truth is that there are managerial alternatives out there, and an imaginative appointment like Klopp, with his heavy metal football, could expand Arsenal's horizons. Equally, it could prove a disaster. But the inherent conservatism prevailing at Arsenal means we will never find out. On the 19th anniversary of Wenger's appointment, there seems little doubt he will reach 20, even as Klopp waits patiently on the sidelines, waiting for a call.
0 comments:
Post a Comment