Chelsea have shot themselves in foot

It is about far more than simply the signature of a French teenager. Gael Kakuta, lured from Lens to London illegally in the eyes of football's governing body, may or may not prove to be, as he has been christened, "the black Zidane", but he has inadvertently revealed much about Chelsea, and too little of it is flattering. If, following last week's Fifa ruling, Chelsea are unable to sign players until 2011, they have 16 months to ponder the conclusions that can be deduced from "Gaelgate".

Chelsea have displayed an acquisitive nature to accompany questionable methods. A sense of entitlement that some of the richest clubs possess does not automatically permit them to sign players. Frank Arnesen's approach can be queried; so, too, can his impact. Chelsea's recently promoted sporting director moved from Tottenham (in similarly debateable circumstances) with a reputation as a fine judge of talent that has been dented by his time at Stamford Bridge. The Dane appears to have adopted a scattergun approach; now one bullet has done significant damage to Chelsea, but others have scarcely grazed their major rivals.

Players such as Sergio Tejera (now at Real Mallorca) and Morten Nielsen (AZ Alkmaar) have come and gone, discarded before they could debut. A revamped youth system has delivered quantity but rarely quality. Of the 10 players currently gaining experience elsewhere, three have been borrowed by other Premier League clubs: only Michael Mancienne, however, could be confident of a first-team future. Scott Sinclair is a serial loanee, while Franco di Santo is yet to score a senior goal in England.

But over and above individual failings, there is the issue of the club's ethos. In the Roman Abramovich era, Chelsea have never successfully balanced short and long-term objectives; the culture of the club may not allow them to. Such seemingly distant aims as becoming self-sustaining by 2009 have not been realised, yet despite the rapid turnover of managers, the first team have remained in contention for silverware throughout.

That is where the emphasis lies. The immediacy of the demands, the constant focus on the present, the pragmatism that pervades the club: none lend themselves to the idealism and consistent thought a faith in youth requires. Elsewhere Sir Alex Ferguson and Arsene Wenger have long planned years into the future, safe in the knowledge they will be in situ to execute those plans. Since Jose Mourinho, their Chelsea counterparts have had no such luxury. Guus Hiddink was only ever an interim appointment, Avram Grant always appeared one and results meant Luiz Felipe Scolari was unable to divert his focus from the senior team.

Carlo Ancelotti can anticipate a longer reign, but his is a record of rejuvenating the careers of veterans, not launching those of a younger generation. But Chelsea is a club where organic growth has long been eschewed for expensive imports; now one of the youth team belongs in that category. Thus far, a lack of promising products from Arnesen has mattered not. Yet if the transfer ban is upheld then now, the youth system acquires a greater importance.

Without appearing on the pitch, Kakuta has already acquired an infamy. That is accompanied by the embarrassment of the highly-remunerated Arnesen, whose achievements elude the majority of observers and the inconvenience caused to Ancelotti, now forced to persist with the ageing players his predecessors signed. Chelsea, whose global quest to win hearts and minds has suffered several damaging setbacks, now find themselves cast into the role of pariahs by Fifa's damning judgment.

@Email:[e-mail]