In a season of collapsed ambition and crushing disappointment for Tottenham Hotspur, Mauricio Pochettino taking the Chelsea job is a final dagger to the heart for their fans.
It is also another serious addition to the charge sheet at Tottenham, who appears a club riven with not just uncertainty but unjustified vanity.
The bare fact that Spurs did not even apparently pick up the phone and talk to Pochettino about returning, in the knowledge that he was open to the prospect, is stunning. As stunning and – yes – vain as letting it be known they would not be pursuing interest in Julian Nagelsmann.
The former Bayern Munich head coach may well, as was feared, be too expensive for Spurs, which is fair enough. But he also had misgivings about the club and who would be its next sporting director – not that chairman Daniel Levy will probably use that title for whoever succeeds Fabio Paratici.
The Italian, banned from sports for 30 months for false accounting while he was with Juventus, had the role of ‘managing director of football’. Whatever that means. But then so much of what Spurs do is mired not just in confusion but in a lack of identity.
The brutal truth is that no one knows what Spurs stand for. It is almost an existential question – and is certainly a philosophical one – but what does Spurs mean? There have been so many apparently knee-jerk, confused decisions that their identity has been lost. There are no cultural signposts as to what Spurs are anymore so it can be, no surprise that it is hard to work out what their planned direction is.
Kane was right in saying Spurs have lost their values
There are a few very good players and some extremely competent staff at Spurs – from the boardroom in Rebecca Caplehorn, the director of football administration and governance, to the football department in performance director Gretar Steinsson, and not least acting head coach Ryan Mason – but where is the route map?
Harry Kane – with one year left on his contract and his own future uncertain – hit the nail on the head in recent interviews when he accused Spurs of having lost values and lacking a culture in recent years. Mason agreed and everyone knew what they meant.
The fact is that since Pochettino was sacked, Spurs have simply lost their way. They were heading in the wrong direction in his final months, but that appeared largely due to a lack of investment in the squad that was catching up on them.
After Pochettino’s sacking Levy has been guilty of poor judgment and bad appointments as he hired a succession of short-term managers in the forlorn pursuit of immediate success: Jose Mourinho, Nuno Espirito Santo and Antonio Conte.
Player recruitment has been just as disappointing and Spurs, with their superb stadium and excellent training ground, look like they are rattling around in accommodation way above their station.
And now their best manager for many years, the one who helped them almost shed that ‘Spursy’ reputation, has joined their bitter rivals. How will it look to Kane, who almost single-handedly guided Spurs to eighth in the Premier League, if Pochettino lifts a trophy in this country before he does?
Spurs could have had him back. Instead it appears Levy could not swallow his pride and do so. Instead it looked like he could not stomach bringing back a manager he has unsuccessfully replaced and having to shell out tens of millions of pounds for those who followed him into the dug-out and were also sacked.
That, too, unfortunately smacks of vanity from Levy, who appears to have made serious mistakes and not least after being so unnerved by Spurs involvement in the European Super League.
Arsenal also stupidly signed up to that, but – and this may hurt Spurs even more than Pochettino going to Chelsea – they have now left their north London neighbors behind because they have organized themselves properly.
Just look at Arsenal compared to Spurs. The clubs have similar-sized stadiums. They have similar budgets and are similar in scale. But that is where the comparison ends.
Arsenal have bought in Arteta like Spurs did with Pochettino
Arsenal have bought into Mikel Arteta the way Spurs used to buy into Pochettino and have created an environment and support structure around him to succeed. The pathway is there. No one is talking about the owner, ‘silent’ Stan Kroenke anymore. Everyone is talking about Arteta, the players and using this season’s unexpected title bid as a bridgehead rather than the endgame.
In 2015/16 Spurs came close but did not kick on. They finished second the following year but were already over-reaching. The Champions League final felt like the completion of something rather than, as with Liverpool who won that game, the continuation of it. That is the difference.
What Spurs have done with the training ground, stadium and the general running of the club is impressive. The organic growth is highly commended.
Levy has moved them up, made them competitive in an environment when they were up against clubs with superior resources. But they plateaued and that plateau is in danger of turning into a downward slope because of the short-termism that has infected the club and for which the chairman has to take responsibility.
Pochettino could have helped with the cultural reset, the re-finding of values, which Spurs must perform and maybe Levy will delegate his new, de facto No. 2, Scott Munn, the incoming chief football officer, to execute that. It would make sense for Levy.
For Spurs it is about much more than making the right managerial appointment. Whoever comes in has to have the right conditions; to work under the right identity. Otherwise he, as with all of Pochettino’s successors, is doomed to fail.
Meanwhile, Pochettino is back in football and at Chelsea. It will be a twist of the knife for Spurs fans.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month, then enjoy 1 year for just $9 with our US-exclusive offer.