The former England manager believes Chelsea can survive their current crisis and that the club need not be a place of torment
Sven-Goran Eriksson came to mull over his past in England but it seemed as if he might also have a future here. The Chelsea job lies vacant following the dismissal of André Villas-Boas, with the Swede in town and reminding everyone of his experience, particularly with substantial clubs. It appears that he may have considered leaving the England team and taking the Chelsea post in 2003, the year of the club's takeover by Roman Abramovich.
"I know him as a very nice man, very quiet," said Eriksson of the Russian. "I met him 10 or 15 times for a cup of tea. Not spending one week with him. For me his passion is great." There was no suggestion that there has been any contact between the Swede and Abramovich over the current vacancy but Eriksson does have the CV of a genuine candidate. He is also familiar with the club scene in this country, even if he did not last very long at Manchester City or Leicester City.
Eriksson took care to suggest that Chelsea need not be a place of torment. "If you work for [Manchester] United, Manchester City or Chelsea today, it's about results," he said. "They are huge clubs, big money, so I can understand it. Next season, for example, why can't Chelsea win the League, the Champions League, as much as United or Manchester City? If [Abramovich] needs to buy, I am sure he will."
It is arguable that Eriksson should be considered a candidate ready to retake control of the national team for Euro 2012. The case of the obvious appointee is delicate since the FA can scarcely approach the Tottenham manager, Harry Redknapp, without being accused of disrupting a promising campaign for the club.
"If Harry takes it from the end of the season and goes into Euros, it's not a perfect situation for him because of the time," said Eriksson. "If he takes the job, it would be better he does it after the Euros in the two years up to the World Cup."
It is intriguing to witness Eriksson in this role of career adviser, particularly when the advice might indirectly advance his own case. Prior to the unsatisfactory period at Leicester that ended in dismissal, he spent 11 months with Manchester City under the then owner Thaksin Shinawatra. "He wouldn't even speak to me," Eriksson said of the reaction to defeat by his otherwise convivial boss.
Of late Eriksson has studied the furore around the England captaincy. "My surprise was not Scott Parker," he said of the match with Holland, "but that you had [Steven] Gerrard on the pitch," hinting that the latter should have had the armband. Time has moved on and the assumption that Gerrard should be the leader reminds one that the Swede's spell with England has begun to fade.
Eriksson at least likes the relaxed setting of Krakow in which England will be based this summer. The contrast with the retreat favoured by Fabio Capello for the World Cup in 2010 is stark. "Football players are professional today," he said, "and I've never understood why it's a huge problem in England being in the city. If the ladies want to have a party let them party – I don't think it reflects on the players. The tournament I was at they come in the afternoon, they leave and that's it.
"It's a long time they are together and English players get bored very quickly. If you take Sweden, for years they've only stayed in the city centres and they change hotel now and then just to change the scene. They get a huge freedom. You never get questions about why the wives are there. You get less bored if you live in the city centre. You have two hours in the afternoon – go out."
He also favours another kind of retreat. "Fight for a winter break," Eriksson urged. "You need it. That's the most important thing to reach the semi-finals. Everybody here agrees but it was a 'no' from the Premier League. 'You can't do it.' It doesn't need to be a big break. Give them seven days off. In Italy it's a law – you are not allowed to take the football players into the club for [those] seven days unless they are injured."
Eriksson comes across now as a budding consultant on football issues. It is in some respects an easier profession than front-line management. At heart, though, he still yearns for tension, if only so he can again show how well he disguises it. There seems no pressing reason why the world should turn to him.
He has the gravitas of a man above the fray. It could be a long time before an outsider like him re-enters our midst if the FA is determined to appoint native candidates as managers from now on. With his air of irony, though, Eriksson still seems an honorary Englishman.