Alo88
Milan Legend
Perhaps because he had to defend his position against the incessant media hounding claiming he was never really close to Pep in the first place?
According to many on here, the Pep story was all a sham to make everyone feel like a genuine attempt was made before moving onto the cheap, unambitious and unpopular Pirlo?
This goes both ways.
So the story is confirmed now because... Maldini says it happened?
"He was already drawing up line-ups, he was asking for less money than Gattuso and he told us he was ready – until he decided he wasn't."
Boh. It's Maldini, so I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt, and I'm not saying he's making the story up. But his own account isn't exactly independent confirmation of his own account either.
And that's not really what bothers me anyway. It's this pattern with Maldini that I struggle with. Malagò may be the biggest dinosaur in Italian football (he probably is so fuck him), but at least he went in front of the cameras, described the split as consensual and openly took responsibility for the decision that ultimately led to it. End of story.
Maldini, meanwhile, once again walks away when things don't go his way and then starts airing the dirty laundry afterwards. Who wanted whom, who changed what, what had supposedly been agreed and whose fault it ultimately was. Maybe he's completely right about all of it. But at some point you also start wondering why working relationships involving him seem to end with bridges burned so often.
That's what I meant with my original post. It's not about defending Malagò or claiming the Guardiola story was a sham. I just find this whole former-SD ritual of explaining afterwards how everything would have worked out if only everyone else had stuck to the plan a bit tiring and unworthy of a persona like Maldini.




