Is Chelsea's ownership undermining the manager's authority?

Although there is a possibility that the reports could be false, if taken for their word, it is a really concerning sight for many reasons. Firstly, it shifts the power dynamics heavily in favor of the sporting directors and the other executives making the decisions. 

There are many advantages of delegating authority to sporting directors, as they can sustain a long-term vision for the club. However, ideally, a balance needs to be found, as a shift in power to either end can seed fundamental issues in the relationship between the two parties.

A decade or two ago, it was the case that the manager or head coach would be the lead person calling the shots in most if not all, football-related aspects of the club. Over the years, that has changed - epitomized by clubs like Liverpool and Brighton, who have commissioned that authority to different members of the club's decision-making body.

Clearlake Capital hoped to instill a similar model at Chelsea after taking over the reins at West London in 2022. 

Todd Boehly and Behdad Eghbali instituted a new hierarchical structure that shifted responsibilities toward the sporting directors - Paul Winstanley and Lawrence Stewart - and the many others forming the pyramid.

However, the recent push in power toward the sporting directors does not seem beneficial in the long run, as it indicates potential interference with a manager's freedom.