The quandary is that we will likely never know which of Jose's allegations about the running of the club are true, which are not, which are partly true, and which things were never even mentioned in public. *if* as he says, Frank Arnesen was given authority *over* Mourinho's as early as August in making transfer deals, and if he was subsequently responsible for the Cole / Gallas swap deal, then in that particular case I would agree with Jose that it is appalling behaviour from Abramovich (the kind of behaviour many originally feared from his kind of sugar-daddies). Of course, then the question arises as to why Jose kept saying he wanted Ashley Cole in those final weeks of August, instead of keeping mum about the matter. And why he used Cole extensively ahead of Bridge (did he *have* to? Did he have to use Andriy too? He says no, but then if he says yes, that would show him to have no authority at all - and the victimised, poor manager is not a role that would go over Jose Mourinho, Special One, easily. He has still to be seen as a fighter.)
And I feel that 'fighter' image is a part of why Mourinho is now slating his own players. With one thing over the other he must feel that now is the time to take risks - shred his own players in the media, inspire some good performances, use the public and the media and wrest control of his own team back from Roman Abramovich - or leave. Frankly I think the level of player-criticising he has done was overkill and the first option will not materialise as well as he would like: thus the rumours that he will leave in the summer. But then, if he did leave, it would neither vindicate him nor prevent a damaging of his previously excellent reputation at managing. Even with "Arnesen's Transfers", even with Abramovich refusing to buy yet more players in January (seriously wtf?), Chelsea should perform better and could perform better. Whose fault is it that Ballack and Shevchenko are underperforming SO Badly? Who was responsible for most of the transfers anyway? And how can Mourinho complain, say, that Sheva is underperforming when at Arsenal Thierry Henry underperformed? That he has no centreback, when we have only one full-back per side that is not a youngster? (Actually, Clichy's a youngster too, and coming back from injury...) The kind of squad problems he has this season are ones any manager has always had and will always have - maybe he has forgotten that during his Chelsea years.
I think the best situation *for football* that could come now is for Mourinho to leave in disgrace, for Abramovich to abandon a club in disarray soon after, then new personnel in all levels of staff eventually come in and refit the team which will still compete in the top 5, having let go of a few of its higher-priced players. A mini-implosion then restructuring, if you will. Because Mourinho has helped escalate the drama so much and he seems unable to bring Chelsea out of its rut, I do not believe the current Chelsea 'administration' is able to use the Roman dollars to maintain a top standard of performance *and* play football that is enjoyable for the fans. Perhaps that could happen with a different sugar-daddy, or a different manager, or just with different players. But could that now happen with Chelsea, Roman and Jose? I'm not sure.