Mapping Roberto Mancini's affinity for ex-Yugoslavian football(ers)

One thing that's been on my mind for quite some time now is why Roberto Mancini seems to have an affinity for players that come from the ex-Yugoslavian countries. Though I would not call this an obsession for him, it is clear that his teams are constantly connected to players from these countries (Inter was dubbed "InterIC" during pre-season, before Kovacic left, when most people thought that they'd see all of Kovacic, Perisic, Jovetic, Brozovic on the same team; IC is the usual duo of letters on the tails of surnames of people who come from Serbia, Montenegro, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina and a little less frequently Slovenia). There's also other players that have been with him across clubs (some of them owe a lot of their development to him) such as Kolarov, Nastasic, Mihajlovic, Stankovic etc. (the last 2 of which are important not only as a product of his interest in Yugoslavian footballers, but also as a cause to it - I will mention them later). He also wanted Stevan Jovetic while he was at City.

Now, I have been given counter-arguments (by my friend Badar Akhtar - @ILPazzinho77 on Twitter) such as that Jovetic and Kolarov were already well known at the point where he wanted them at City, and that Inter's interest in Brozovic (as well as some other Dinamo players who are reportedly on Inter's radar right now) is the product of Inter's good relations with Dinamo, and come down above all to Ausilio's interests rather than Mancini's. He also said that players from ex-Yugoslavian countries are normally cheaper than talents from South American countries would be. And these things hold their water.

But, I'm still quite sure that there are indicators pointing to his abovementioned affinity, and I've finally forced myself into a little "research" today, so I delved into Mancio's past to see what could be the cause. Little did I know that the answers were quite easily discernible, though I would have you know that what I'm writing here is simply based on indications, not on anything he's said or a biography of him (I haven't seen him comment on this anywhere).

Namely, the most obvious (and probably also initiating and most important) influence in this sense probably came from Vujadin Boskov. The legendary coach from Vojvodina led Mancini during the period between 1986 and 1992 at Sampdoria, where Mancini was perhaps the key player. Boskov was a very important part of Yugoslavian football, being one of Yugoslavia's most esteemed people, and especially having led Yugoslavia during the Euros in 2000 in Belgium and the Netherlands, and also from 1971-1973 before that. Boskov was Mancini's coach for 6 years!

Another wave of influence surely came from Sinisa Mihajlovic, the current head coach of Milan. Mancio and Mihajlovic are close friends to this day, but they met as players of Sampdoria, where they played together from 1994 to 1997, at which point Mancini departed for Lazio. Mihajlovic followed him there in 1998 and they together until 2001. After that, Mancini became coach of Lazio in 2002 and coached Mihajlovic until 2004, at which point Mancini moved to Inter, only to bring Mihajlovic to play for Inter and coach him until Sinisa retired in 2006. After Mihajlovic retired, Mancini made him his assistant from 2006 to 2008, when Mancini left the club and Mourinho came in. They've worked together for 12 years, and even when they didn't work together they remained close friends.

Another influence, as I've mentioned before, is probably also Dejan Stankovic. Stankovic and Mancini met as players of Lazio, where their stays overlapped in the period between 1998 and 2001. In 2002, Mancini became coach of Lazio, and coached Stankovic. Later, when Mancini became the coach of Inter, he brought Stankovic to the club in 2004 and remained his coach until the departure in 2008. There is also the fact that with Mancini's return to Inter last season, he didn't wait long and re-called Stankovic to the club, making him team manager this summer. That's more than 10 years spent together for the 2, in 2 different clubs.

There is also Alen Boksic, the Croatian striker who played for Lazio. Boksic played for Lazio from 1997 to 2000 (his 2nd stint, having played for them also from 1993 to 1996), so they spent 3 years together with Mancini. I am not aware of any special connection formed between the two during this period, though.

Each one of Boskov, Mihajlovic and Stankovic are influential characters in Yugoslavian football, and each one of them bore the quality of Yugoslavian football culture in a different way. I firmly believe that it brushed up on Mancini as well, and his appreciation is not only visible in the later acquisitions of Nastasic, Kolarov, Brozovic, Jovetic, but especially on the fact that he carries Mihajlovic and Stankovic around with him.

It is not at all weird that Mancini has warmed up to Yugoslavian football culture. Living in one of the countries of ex Yugoslavia (Macedonia), I've personally witnessed some and heard about all other successes that Yugoslavia (and subsequently the countries that remained of it after its tragic dissolution) has noted in football.
Yugoslavia is the home of Red Star Belgrade - a club that won the European Champions Cup in 1991 (on the brink of Yugoslavia's dissolution) v. Marseille, with players such as Vladimir Jugovic (later played for Inter), Darko Pancev (later played for Inter), Robert Prosinecki, Dejan Savicevic and, indeed, Sinisa Mihajlovic.

They've also won the Mitropa Cup twice in 1958 and 1968, and later finished as runners up in the ECC in 1979, the last season of the legendary Dragan Dzajic, among other great players of that time.

Then there's also Croatia's success at the 1998 World Cup in France, where they finished 3rd, eliminating Germany in the quarter finals with an emphatic 3-0 triumph. They lost in the semi finals to host country France, who would later go on to win the tournament, and beat the Netherlands in the 3rd place playoff with 2-1. Croatian striker Davor Suker, who played for Real Madrid at the time, finished the tournament as top scorer with 6 goals scored.

This Croatia team also included legendary Zvonimir Boban, Dario Simic, Robert Prosinecki and current West Ham coach Slaven Bilic.

Other great names that have emerged from the Yugoslavian spaces over the years include Dragan "Piksi" Stojkovic, Predrag Mijatovic, Dragoslav Sekularac, Savo Milosevic etc.

Though clubs from the ex-Yugoslavian countries haven't noted any significant success in recent years, there are a number of players who have broken through the ranks of great names such as Red Star Belgrade (the first club of Nemanja Vidic), Partizan Belgrade (who, by the way, produced Stevan Jovetic), Dinamo Zagreb (Modric), Hajduk Split etc. to go on and become leading names in world football.
Just imagine a united team of Yugoslavian countries today:

And this still leaves players like Begovic, Oblak, Nastasic, Savic, Subotic (even Vidic), Kovacic, Perisic, Ljajic, Brozovic, Tadic, Ilicic, Dzeko... Maybe even Xherdan Shaqiri (who is of Albanian ethnicity and was born in Gjilan, Kosovo, which was at the time still part of Serbia and consequently of Yugoslavia), though he might have still chosen to play for Albania. I could also go with Ibrahimovic... but that's really a long shot, since he was born in Malmo, Sweden (just pointing out that he is of Bosnian descent). :)
In short, it is a team that could easily challenge the very biggest bosses of world football right now.

And who knows, considering how close to his heart Mancini seems to keep ex-Yugoslavia, who knows, maybe if it didn't dissolve, Mancio could have even coached the national team at some point. If only... :) 

#TeamFeghouli - vai Piero!

Though I hate transfer rumors in the middle of October - I read something this morning that made me feel all warm and cuddly inside - that Inter are interested in signing Sofiane Feghouli from Valencia in January. Thohir did hint that Inter would be buying in January, so I thought this was a good enough reason to let my mind wander (when I should be spending my time on more important things, obviously) and fantasize about how Feghouli would fit into our team. 

*Disclaimer - there is still no indication that Inter is interested, it's only the media talking. Even worse, it's Tuttosport talking. But bear with me.

Ok, so basically - a couple of reasons why I would love to have Feghouli at Inter.

First of all - he wouldn't be expensive. He should fit our parameters. His contract is expiring this summer, which means that Valencia can't ask for much money (Merdasport announced that the price would be ~5m euro). Our mission now should be to convince him not to sign a new contract with Valencia and to choose to leave this winter for a team that will accommodate him right away and where a player of his profile would be more than welcome. Apart from this, Lim's alleged friendship with Moratti should make things easier.

He would also reportedly be highly appreciated by a world class coach like Mancini (who should be picking his phone up as I'm writing this). Considering that Mancini likes his players hard working and physically strong and resilient - Feghouli should fit the picture just fine.

Another reason to buy Feghouli is that he is only 25 years old.

He's also got a French passport which means that the non-EU rule would not be a problem.

Then, he's a very good player and would fit perfectly into our system. Mancini has been hesitant in adopting 4231 and has said that he could do it later on in the season. If he uses it now, one of his wingers won't be making the necessary defensive contribution to cover for the lateral space in midfield and help out our incomplete full backs (they're decent, especially Telles, but not complete).

Feghouli, like Perisic, is a very hard working player. He runs around a lot and helps out the team in the defensive phase. Also, like Perisic, Feghouli is a player that plays with both feet (and if necessary on both sides), which is massively important for a wide player, as he can both cross and cut inside to take shots. He is also good in aerial duels, which makes us a threat from both sides of the pitch, as the wingers would be able to help Icardi out in finishing off each other's crosses (though Feghouli is not as good at crossing as Perisic, his passing and vision are still decent).
He's not quite as fast as Perisic, but still has pace.

Having 2 wingers like Perisic and Feghouli is just enough to give the necessary muscle to cover the wide spaces in what is an already impressively strong midfield made up ideally of Melo and Kondogbia. Effectively, in the defensive phase the team would form a kind of a 4411.

Our current problem in the 3 man midfield of not having anyone creative to move the ball around would be alleviated in 4231, since the ball would move a lot more on the flanks (taken over by Feghouli and Perisic), and of course, the main creative outlet of the team would be expected from Stevan Jovetic (meaning the creative center of the team would move further up the pitch), who would move into the channels to pick up the ball and instantly carve up space for Icardi in front of him or for one of the wingers cutting inside or waiting out wide. The only problem here is that Jovetic will take a lot of beating this way, because once the ball reaches him, with all the options that open up everywhere, the opposition will have to be very quick to cut him down. I'd keep Ljajic around, just in case.

Also, the quality of width in the 4231 and the fact that Jojo will surely have someone on himself at all times - will also release space in which Kondogbia can burst in to take shots. 

All in all - I believe he'd be a fantastic addition and can't think of many realistic targets that would fit in better with our team. Let's see if the situation develops, but I'd love to see Feghouli at Inter.

Vai Piero! 

A key moment of Mourinho's career - evolution

What I'm about to write here has barely anything to do with Inter, other than the fact that it concerns one of the most successful coaches in our club's history, a man who left a permanent mark by winning the Treble in that unforgettable 09/10 season.

Mourinho is currently heavily under fire at Chelsea. And it's not unjustified either - the results this season have been bad, the team isn't playing well. They don't even seem motivated to win, which is unforgivable considering the fact that other great teams like Barcelona could hold on to their motivation for years, even after domination in Europe. In this sense, I believe Mourinho shares in the responsibility, though he obviously cannot be the only one responsible. But I think I can define his own responsibility later in this post.

Mourinho's approach:
Obviously, being my favorite coach in the world, I've given a lot of thought about Mourinho's approach and what it is that causes his teams to implode in his 3rd season. I believe I've come to understand him well by now, and my conclusion has been that he needs to change his approach if he wants to survive among the elites on the long term, that's to say if he wants to take the next step and go for a long tenure at a club like SAF did with United.

I'll try to explain.
I'm not sure if Mourinho has been a nomad (moving from one country to another without long spells at a single club) because he didn't feel he was capable of staying in one place for too long, or if he did it because he really wanted to win everywhere before he settles down. Either way, so far it's worked well - he's broken a number of records in several countries and is one of four managers in history to have won in 4 different countries.

However, upon his return to Chelsea, Mourinho said that he wants to finally settle down and build something great and sustainable with the London side. The problem, though, is that Mourinho's approach is currently not one for long term spells. Here's why:

I believe that an essential part of Mourinho's success has always been that he wants to maintain the underdog mentality within his team, which is funny, because it makes his players humble and willing to work, but at the same time gives them confidence that they are the best. When everything's the way Mou likes it - you can send just about anyone against his teams and they'll just smile at you and keep on coming. Inter was the "most Mourinho team" ever in 2010 - they were untouchable and were completely molded in his image. You could also see glimpses of it with his old Chelsea, but less so with the new one and with his Real Madrid team (as brilliant as they were in football terms).
Anyway, how does he do it? He basically conjures up a challenge, inflates it (sometimes out of proportion) and then spins around it the illusion that the world is against him and his team, making them fold and stick together. He is also often very protective of his players, even in situations when they are blatantly wrong.
Feeling protected and defensive at the same time, his players trust him and love him beyond measure (until some point, I'll explain why later) and they are prepared to do things for him that they normally wouldn't do (eyes on Pepe at Real Madrid, who was a raging lunatic under Mourinho, but regained discipline when Ancelotti came around, without losing any of the quality). They trust him because they believe he always knows what he's doing. And in most cases, he does, as he has so often proven before with his meticulous preparations. Other than this, bear in mind that Mourinho's background points to the fact that he is an expert in communication - he's worked as a translator and has also worked with children with disabilities (thanks to @worldfootballcm for pointing that out to me). He understands communication deeply and you can see this in his relationship with his players and his capability to manipulate the press. This is why I believe that his extravagant behavior in public is, in most cases, actually well thought out. He causes scandals so that the press will attack him (which often keeps attention off the players) and this boosts the story that he sells to his players and his clubs, while also sending out a message to the referees and the media, that if they go against his teams they'll have to deal with him in the press room - which is no simple matter at all, especially as long as they're dealing with a man who wins on the field. It's easy to defeat a loser, but winners are those who write history, and this guy will give you quite the fight.

Now, how he did this at every club he's managed:
* He did it with Porto. Obviously, it was very easy to make them feel like underdogs in Europe, though this does not in any way detract their heroic feat.
* He did it with Chelsea the 1st time around - probably made them feel like they had a point to prove with all the $$ that Roman invested in the club.  
* He did it with Inter - Inter being a club that's always had that mentality anyway - being abused and campaigned against by the Italian media etc. He also probably used Moratti's ambition to match the success of his father's Inter and the 45 year drought in the CL probably was a huge motivating factor that Mourinho used on the players (especially players like Zanetti, Samuel, Cambiasso, Lucio etc. who had the necessary experience and will do make that final push) Further proof of this is that Mourinho's Inter didn't break down when they won the 1st Scudetto with him (they had been used to winning the Scudetto at that point), but it did break down (and probably would've broken down even if he had stayed) after they won the CL. Their raison d'etre was gone, the ordeal was completed. 
* He did it with Real Madrid. As difficult as it may seem to make Real Madrid look like underdogs - he did it. And he did it thanks to the fact that Barcelona were so good at the time. His victory against Barca with Inter in the CL 1/2 final in 2010 also helped him out a lot in that sense, because it was a huge reason why Real Madrid hired him in the 1st place - they thought he was the antidote to Barcelona. He also benefited from this a lot to gain the confidence of the board and his players - getting powers as manager that perhaps no other manager had gotten with Real Madrid before him. Like with Inter winning the CL - Real Madrid lost a big part of their reason to work hard when they beat Barca to the title in La Liga and when they started beating them fairly regularly in direct duels. The fact that Real Madrid broke down before he could win them the CL was an indicator that the success over Barcelona caused a decline in motivation, while the pressure was still huge. It was logical that when Ancelotti arrives, the only challenge that he will pose to them would be La Decima - which is exactly what happened. Ancelotti won La Decima, but the will for Real to dominate in Spain was gone. They're still waiting for a La Liga title after Mourinho destroyed Spain with that Real Madrid. 
* Finally - he did it with Chelsea the 2nd time around, playing the fragile trick that Chelsea were a "small horse in a big horse race" (remember that?), implying that the team was still young and had a lot to learn and is in the middle of the most difficult league to win in the world etc. I thought he would now try to sell them the CL challenge, finally going head to head with the big guys like Barcelona, Bayern, Real Madrid etc. but it doesn't seem like he'll make it and, to be frank, I don't think this team is capable of it yet, otherwise that would've been the central challenge he would base his work on in the 1st place. He obviously thought he had a team capable of winning the EPL and set out to do that, but now that it's done, the motivation isn't there to bring on the next level. I'll explain.

This kind of approach is hardly a sustainable one. Why? First of all, because it puts the players under tremendous pressure and they can't put up with it for too long. Being told that the entire world is against you for more than 2 years of your life and feeling like you have to do things that aren't really pleasant to do has a way of wearing you out. While he is capable of holding on under such pressure for a long time, because he always wants to win - most players aren't capable of it.
Under such circumstances, when the players have completed the original challenge, it's very difficult to get them raring to go for the next one, because they're simply tired. At this point, you'll notice that the relationship between him and his players snaps - he starts speaking of rats, moles and whatnot who give up his tactical plans to the media before important games, accuses people of not playing well in public etc. That relationship is even more fragile when the players involved are players of equal stature to his own (it's how his tenure with Real Madrid was ended). All of this because they simply can't hold up to his standards anymore. That's partly the fault of the players, but it's also partly bad management on his part.
Chelsea's problems actually didn't start this summer. You could notice a significant drop in performances last season as well, somewhere before spring. For some reason, the performances of many players dropped significantly; everyone except maybe Hazard and to a lesser extent Matic was playing badly. Hazard basically had to drag Chelsea to the title for a large part of the season. And then there's that inexplicable game v. PSG. Mourinho teams don't do that in big games, not when they have it as easy as Chelsea did v. PSG. Perhaps the friction had already been there at that point, but the challenge of having to win the EPL was what kept the team together until this summer.
Actually, you could notice something in the interview he gave after the game v. Southampton - among other things, he says that by sending him away, Chelsea would send away the best coach that they've (ever) had. And that's just reminding them how important he's been and gaining leverage to get another chance. But what he says after that is very important - he says that it would also send out a message to the players, *the same message that's been sent to them for the past 10 years* (i.e. since he left) - that the coach is always the one to blame. The impression he leaves is that he feels that the players feel too comfortable and too powerful, and this would become a problem for Chelsea if the club decide to remove a manager of his stature, after all he's done for Chelsea, from his job because they don't feel like playing for him anymore.
He also made sure to mention, several times, that EVERYONE at the club has to take responsibility. He's even singled out a couple of performances lately, and replaced Matic after 27 minutes on the field on that game, having introduced him at half time in the first place.

Apart from this, Mourinho has come a long way since the time he was still actually an underdog. He has become a brand, an institution within football. This makes it much more difficult for him to implement the fundamentals of his approach - Mourinho is simply not an underdog anymore. There's also the fact that he now coaches only clubs of the very highest stature, with a lot of money involved (which is quite easily visible in how his own taste has become more and more expensive over time). It's impossible to make Real Madrid or Chelsea look like the underdog forever. It might work in a specific situation (like I mentioned before when I explained how he did it at each club) - but it won't work over a longer period of time.
Also worth mentioning about the current situation, though, is that Mourinho will find it very difficult and will have to produce something he hasn't produced before to get out of this situation. That's due to the fact he never has been in such a situation - he never has lost this much, he doesn't deal with being low on the table with a top team.

So this leaves Jose with 2 options - one of which is to change his approach and to start basing his success on something which is more sustainable. I have no idea how he'd do this, but from what I know, SAF was quite similar to Mourinho once upon a time - maybe even encountered the same problems and ultimately managed to adapt and go on to become one of the greatest (if not THE greatest) of all time.
Thus, one should keep an eye on how Chelsea act, because there might just be a possibility that Abramovich is ready to take Jose's 3rd season crap and persist to see how he'll do in his 4th season. It would be a great test for Chelsea if they ever really meant to build a dynasty with Mourinho. Let's not think that all of Ferguson's years with United were fantastic, but United put up with it and that's what gave birth to the legend.
Obviously, staying with Chelsea is the real test for Mourinho as well - he'll finally get to reach a 4th season with a single club and I believe it will be a completely new terrain for him - so it's logical to expect to see new things from him as well - and that's always interesting.

The other option is for him to carry on being a nomad and keep moving from club to club (for at least some time more). I've got only 1 idea about where he could go next if he leaves Chelsea (which, at this point no longer entirely depends on him because his position is very, very fragile) - that's PSG. Though obviously the French league won't be a major challenge for him, it will be an addition to the list of countries he's won in. PSG will obviously be able to fulfill all his demands as far as players go and he will be able to sell them the story about them belonging among Europe's elite etc. (they already have a squad which is quite capable of fighting it out with the best). For PSG it would be a great move in terms of marketing and purely footballing terms - they'd get one of the very best, proving that their ambition is to be among the very best.
Another potential option is Germany, which would, in my opinion, only be an option for Jose in lack of other options because he doesn't speak the language and for that he has said that he wouldn't want to coach in Germany (he considers knowing the language to be essential for his work because, as I mentioned before, he bases a lot of his approach on communication).
I'm pretty sure he won't return to Italy because Inter can't afford him right now (and also because they seem to be intent on trusting Mancini to refurbish the team) and he won't coach another Serie A side, as he has said countless times before.
In Spain, I feel that for him there is only Real Madrid and Barcelona, neither of which wants him (and I don't think it'd be a good idea for him to join either anyway). Maybe Atleti if Simeone is somehow leaving, but that's a very very long shot.
Finally, England - the only option I see there is for United to get rid of LvG and for him to take his place as the heir of Ferguson. But also a long shot.

Do I expect Jose to get past this and come back stronger (with Chelsea or another side) - I do. He's incredibly intelligent and the worst case scenario is that he'll need some time to think about the tweaks that he needs to make to his approach to adapt it to the new circumstances that he's in.

(this next part you don't have to read, just provides perspective on all the public junk being written on him, but all reasonable readers won't need it):
One could say that other coaches in England have had it far easier with very limited success, but I don't think Jose' should be bothered by that - judging him on high standards is an indicator about just how good he is. If you're Wenger, spend 10 years without a major trophy and nobody says a thing - it's probably because they don't expect it of you. I think he'd be disgusted if people stop expecting it of him eventually, so there's some sort of perverse enjoyment of the pressure that he's always under. I think he loves it, though as he said he loves it more when he's top of the table with 1 point ahead of the runners up. I really liked what he said before the Southampton game about this being "a fantastic period in his career, despite the fact that it comes too late; because he can learn from his mistakes", but also that "he doesn't want it to happen again".

Needless to mention, though, some people cross the line. Suddenly the debate is no longer about how well or how badly Mourinho is doing this season. Instead, some people are trying to spread the fire to his legacy and to his past success - trying to say that this season, indeed, casts a shadow on all his previous success, implying somehow that he was either "lucky", or "always had all the money in the world at his disposal" etc.
People, seriously - get the fuck off. The man has done enough in his career to not have to win a single game for the remainder of it and still come off as one of the best of all times. Name me a coach other than Guardiola who has had a bigger effect on football in the last 10-15 years (and not only in a tactical sense).
- In his 12 years of top football management (since he joined Porto), he's only finished 3rd once; he's won the league 8 times (across 4 different countries, in EVERY country he's worked in) and finished as runner up 3 times.
- He's won the Champions' League twice (once with Porto and once with Inter, becoming the first coach in history to complete a treble in Italy)
- He's won the UEFA Cup (the season before he won the CL with Porto, so his domination with Porto wasn't a one off thing)
- He's won 8 Cups/League Cups
- He's won 4 Super Cups
- Between 2002 and 2011 (yes, 9 fucking years), he went through a streak of 150 home league matches without defeat. Take a second to think about that.
- Set the record in Spain for most league games won in a single season (32) in 2011/2012, most away wins (16), most points in any of the biggest European leagues (100), most goals per season (121) and highest goal difference (+89)
- Won his 1st EPL trophy with a record 95 points

I believe that should give you the right perspective when you decide to criticize his legacy or say that he's overrated as a coach.
Is Jose a perfect manager? Of course not, who is? Is he a perfectly nice person - no. He's done things that he should be ashamed of (the incident with Tito Villanova above all, then also the incident with Eva Carneiro), he sometimes gives crazy reactions and speaks stuff that makes no sense in press conferences, maybe because he's pissed and maybe because it's a way for him to maintain his grip on the team, to maintain the illusion that everyone is against them. Either way - he's not perfect.
But, he's been a phenomenal manager above all, and he's also done some things that many wouldn't do in his place. Remember that game v. Atletico when Mourinho was already under pressure (at Real Madrid) and he went out on the pitch earlier than his players to let the fans whistle him in order to leave his players untouched by the negative atmosphere? I wouldn't be at all surprised if the persona that Mou presents in public is far different from the one that he really is privately. One thing is quite sure, though - he's ruthless and he does whatever is necessary to win, be it to drop a player that many consider to be his favorite, or to make a scapegoat of someone in order to send out a message to the team. His focus is always on the collective, he does what he does to help the collective play well. He demands more from his players for this, but it works. On most days his methods are brilliant - he puts pressure on the opposition by playing physically, he puts pressure on them by speaking in public etc. And sometimes it gets out of control - like it did with Tito.
But is he one of the best of all time? Damn right, he is. So his legacy remains untouched and he'll more than likely be back sooner than you think. I remember many people thought Mourinho was done when he left Chelsea after his first tenure. Then came Inter. Then people thought he was done after Real Madrid - he won the EPL last season. Now people think he's done again, but he'll pop up sooner or later.

The man is a winner, and it's what he's gonna keep doing, one way or the other.