SIMON JORDAN: Thomas Tuchel's a one-hit, one-tournament appointment

Thomas Tuchel; elite coach, wins things, bit of trouble off the field.

Google his name and you’ll see he’s fallen out with people everywhere he’s been. Maybe The FA have been living under a rock - which is not that an outrageous suggestion – but even they must be aware.

His appointment is a roll of the dice and surprisingly bold and assertive for an organisation that has allowed the Premier League to run riot for 32 years.

But there is a difference between Tuchel doing an international job on an 18-month contract and the situations at PSG, Chelsea and Bayern Munich which all began with trophies and ended in tears.

Tuchel’s problems have been traditionally triggered by his inability to relate to people on a day-to-day basis, particularly when he doesn’t get what he wants.

Maybe the England job is ideal for him. As Dr Pepper would say, what’s the worst that could happen? He won’t be working with the same faces all the time, or playing matches twice-a-week. There isn’t a transfer window in which to lock horns with a sporting director.

No, this is a combination of both a bold and needs-must appointment which flies in the face of what we were expecting. Look, the FA have abdicated responsibility to regulate the domestic game, shamefully allowing that to be a political appointment, but this is a balls-out, no safety net appointment.

Tuchel has only one mission, to produce a team to win the World Cup. It’s not a blueprint for anything else. I don’t think it has to masquerade as such or have other things attached to it.

It’s a tournament appointment which I for one find refreshing. He’ll have 16 meaningful games, eight qualifiers and hopefully eight games at the finals themselves, nothing else.

Why should we ask our England manager to be politicians? They are not good at it. Maybe if Gareth Southgate had spent less time worrying about the optics of societal issues and more forthright on the pitch it might have been better.

The FA have suggested that they cannot pay the wages or compensation to get best in class but by a circumstance of luck and timing have gained access to Tuchel – who even his biggest critic would acknowledge is a significantly talented coach - and quite frankly far more in keeping with the A-list argument, than names such as Graham Potter, Lee Carsley and Eddie Howe.

He provides an interim solution to the over-arching ache of embarrassment that we are the only country to have once won a major tournament and not repeated it for 60 years. An interim solution without any compensation payment necessary!

Tuchel likes English football, has won the biggest club prize with an English side (Chelsea) and wants the job.

Is he a handful? Yes. Does he clash with authority? Yes. In the longer game, could he present you with a problem? Yes. But here’s the beauty, he’s only around until the summer of 2026 - a short burst - and until then won’t be able to buy players, or have someone else presenting them to him.

I realise he’s foreign and dread to think what some of the dregs of our support will do with “Ten German bombers” should results go wrong.

But I’ve seen the Jurassic Park argument from Harry Redknapp about only selecting English managers. I’m afraid they don’t get the jobs because they’re not good enough.

I understand other leading nations pick managers from their own but their leagues are a polar different landscape to ours. How many Spanish owners in Spanish football compared to English owners in our league.

They don’t have the framework where we see the vast majority of Premier League clubs owned and managed by overseas protagonists.

We assume the FA know about Tuchel’s history. Leonardo couldn’t get him out the door fast enough at PSG. It fell apart at Bayern Munich. Chelsea were unhappy with some of his behaviour.

But the reasons for his irritation shouldn’t necessarily exist at international level, presuming he’s not barred from calling up a player on “moral” grounds.

Top club managers get such huge acclaim and rewards they start believing they are the boss, when the reality is they are an employee, no matter the fame and riches. With England, Tuchel will get precisely what he wants in terms of managing the team. It might work well for him.

You would hope he behaves himself but this is football and you can’t put candidates through the litmus test of what the CEO of a bank should look like.

I don’t buy into the legacy argument. Let’s not toot our horns too much about the St George’s Park DNA, most European countries at the top end of world football have had these things for years before we did.

Over at Manchester United, they’ll be viewing with interest, but Sir Jim Ratcliffe won't be having sleepless nights.

As expressed, the job at Old Trafford would have been very different. Their most successful periods have come about through long-term stability and nothing in Tuchel’s past suggests that’s him.

But for this task of taking England to that final step, he could be the right fit. There are clear guidelines, he is solely employed for a single, big tournament.

I’m already looking forward to the speech should he lift the World Cup aloft in the New Jersey Stadium on July 19 2026. Ich bin ein Englander, anyone?

Guardiola is Man City's irreplaceable one

Pep Guardiola is the exception to my usual argument that no manager is an island and success comes through collective effort. He’s the lightning rod for Manchester City’s unprecedented dominance and created a brand of football it was claimed would impossible in England.

There have been tributes for City sporting director Txiki Begiristain who leaves next summer but Guardiola’s future is far more important. It might be better for the Premier League if he moves on – other clubs will get a chance – but at The Etihad he is the irreplaceable one, not Begiristain.

Ferguson's presence no excuse for United's regression 

The TV cameras will turn to Sir Alex Ferguson should Brentford inflict another miserable afternoon on Manchester United at Old Trafford this weekend. It’s an easy image when optics are everything, even though his global ambassador role ends this season.

Has Fergie’s presence at matches been a distraction for his successors? Nobody should use an 82-year-old as an excuse for other people lacking achievement. United’s regression is due to the deeds of their recent managers, not the dangers of harking back to a golden era.

Yet I do have sympathy for Sir Jim Ratcliffe calling time on Sir Alex Ferguson’s well-paid role and the suggestion he shouldn’t be a regular presence around the dressing-room. Can you imagine Ferguson himself wanting someone from the past in his place of work as an obligation.

As for Eric Cantona wailing about the decision, what is he on about? Does he think Sir Alex should be paid millions until the day he dies. In what parallel universe, even for the great architect of the modern Manchester United.