Thomas Tuchel’s sole mission is to win the World Cup. He’s a one-hit, one-tournament appointment. I find it refreshing, writes SIMON JORDAN

Thomas Tuchel — elite manager, wins things, bit of trouble off the field.

Google his name and you’ll see he’s fallen out with people everywhere he’s been. Maybe the FA have been living under a rock — not a particularly outrageous suggestion — but even they must be aware.

His appointment is a roll of the dice, and surprisingly bold and assertive for an organisation who have allowed the Premier League to run riot for 32 years.

But there is a difference between Tuchel doing an international job on an 18-month contract and the situations at Paris Saint-Germain, Chelsea and Bayern Munich which all began with trophies and ended in tears.

Tuchel’s problems have traditionally been triggered by his inability to relate to people on a day-to-day basis, especially when he doesn’t get what he wants.

The appointment is a bold and assertive move by the FA, led by Mark Bullingham, left

Tuchel has shown he is an elite coach and delivers success, but has had trouble off the field

Maybe the England job is ideal for him. As Dr Pepper would say, what’s the worst that could happen? Tuchel won’t be working with the same faces all the time, or playing matches twice a week. There isn’t a transfer window in which to lock horns with a sporting director.

No, this is a combination of a bold and needs-must appointment which flies in the face of what we were expecting.

Look, the FA have abdicated responsibility to regulate the domestic game, shamefully allowing that to be a political appointment, but this is a b***s-out, no-safety-net appointment.

Tuchel has only one mission, to produce a team to win the World Cup. It’s not a blueprint for anything else. I don’t think it has to masquerade as such or have other things attached to it.

It’s a tournament appointment which I, for one, find refreshing. He’ll have 16 meaningful games — eight qualifiers and hopefully eight games at the finals themselves, nothing else.

Why should we ask our England managers to be politicians? They are not good at it. Maybe if Gareth Southgate had spent less time worrying about the optics of societal issues and been more forthright on the pitch, it would have been better.

His spells as Chelsea and Bayern Munich manager began with trophies but ended in tears

The nature of the England job could suit Tuchel and help him avoid the potential for conflicts

The FA have suggested they cannot pay the wages or compensation to get best-in-class but by a circumstance of luck and timing have gained access to Tuchel (right) — who even his biggest critic would acknowledge is a significantly talented coach, and quite frankly far more in keeping with the A-list argument than managers such as Graham Potter, Lee Carsley or Eddie Howe.

He provides an interim solution to the over-arching ache of embarrassment that we are the only country to have once won the World Cup and not repeated it for 60 years.

Tuchel likes English football, has won the biggest club prize with an English side (Chelsea) and wanted the job.

Is he a handful? Yes. Does he clash with authority? Yes. In the longer game, could he present you with a problem? Yes.

But here’s the beauty, he’s only around until the summer of 2026 — a short burst — and won’t be able to buy players, or have someone else presenting them to him.

I realise he’s foreign — and I dread to think what some of the dregs of our support will do with Ten German Bombers should results go wrong.

Tuchel marks a major shift from the FA’s decision to appoint Gareth Southgate as manager

But I’ve seen the Jurassic Park argument from Harry Redknapp about only selecting English managers. I’m afraid they don’t get the jobs because they’re not good enough.

I understand other leading nations pick managers from their own but their leagues are the polar opposite landscape to ours. How many Spanish owners are there in Spanish football compared to English owners in our league?

They don’t have the framework that we do, where the vast majority of Premier League clubs are owned and managed by overseas protagonists.

We assume the FA know about Tuchel’s history. Leonardo, the sporting director, couldn’t get him out the door fast enough at PSG. It fell apart at Bayern Munich. Chelsea were unhappy with some of his behaviour.

But the reasons for Tuchel’s irritation should not necessarily exist at international level, presuming he’s not barred from calling up a player on ‘moral’ grounds.

Top club managers get such huge acclaim and rewards, they start believing they are the boss — when in reality they are an employee, no matter the fame and riches.

With England, Tuchel will get precisely what he wants in terms of managing the team. It might work well for him. You would hope he behaves himself, but this is football and you cannot put candidates through the litmus test of what the chief executive of a bank should look like.

Tuchel is an A-list choice compared to English coaches like Graham Potter and Eddie Hoe

The German could be the right fit to take England to that final step of winning the World Cup

I don’t buy into the legacy argument. Let’s not toot our horns too much about the St George’s Park DNA — most European countries at the top of world football had these things years before we did.

Over at Manchester United, they’ll be viewing with interest, but Sir Jim Ratcliffe won’t be having sleepless nights.

The job at Old Trafford would have been very different. United’s most successful periods have come about through long-term stability and nothing in Tuchel’s past suggests that’s him.

But for this task of making that final step with England, he could be the right fit. There are clear guidelines — he is solely employed for a single, big tournament.

I’m already looking forward to the speech should he lift the World Cup aloft in the MetLife Stadium, New Jersey, on July 19, 2026. Ich bin ein Englander, anyone?

Txiki exit will not hurt City 

Pep Guardiola is the exception to my argument that no manager is an island and success comes through collective effort. He has been the catalyst for Manchester City’s unprecedented dominance and created a brand of football it was claimed would be impossible to achieve in England. 

There have been tributes for City director of football Txiki Begiristain, who will leave at the end of the season, but Guardiola’s future is far more important. 

Man City’s sporting director Txiki Begiristain, left, will leave the club at the end of the season

Pep Guardiola future is the most important as he remains the irreplaceable one at Man City 

It may be better for the Premier League if he moves on — other clubs will have a chance — but at the Etihad he is the irreplaceable one, not Begiristain. 

Why Ratcliffe is right to let Sir Alex go 

The TV cameras will turn to Sir Alex Ferguson should Brentford inflict another miserable defeat on Manchester United at Old Trafford on Saturday. 

It’s an easy image when optics are everything, even though he will leave his global ambassador role at the end of this season. 

Has Fergie’s presence at matches been a distraction for his successors? Nobody should use an 82-year-old as an excuse for other people lacking achievement. United’s regression is due to the deeds of their recent managers, not the dangers of harking back to a golden era. 

Sir Jim Ratcliffe (right) has called an end to Sir Alex Ferguson’s well-paid ambassadorial role

Yet I do have sympathy for Sir Jim Ratcliffe calling time on Ferguson’s well-paid role and the suggestion he shouldn’t be a regular presence around the dressing room. 

Can you imagine Ferguson wanting someone from the past in his place of work as an obligation? 

As for Eric Cantona wailing about the decision, what is he on about? Does he think Ferguson should be paid millions until the day he dies? In what parallel universe, even if he is the great architect of the modern Manchester United?