Maldini Resigns: Power Struggle in Italian Football
Paolo Maldini’s return to the heart of Italian football lasted just two weeks. It ended not with a quiet statement, but with a clash over power, principles and the future of the national team.
The former Italy and Milan icon resigned as the Azzurri’s technical director on Monday, walking away alongside his advisor Leonardo after a bitter stand-off with CONI president Giovanni Malagò and the FIGC over the choice of the next Italy coach.
At the centre of the storm: Andrea Pirlo, Roberto Mancini, Antonio Conte and Thiago Motta.
A vision blocked at every turn
Maldini and Leonardo arrived with a clear idea of what they wanted. They pushed hard for Pirlo, convinced he should be the man to lead Italy into a new cycle. The FIGC refused.
The political fallout around Pirlo’s role as a brand ambassador for a Russian betting company proved decisive. Malagò, wary of the negative reactions already swirling around the former midfielder, shut the door. For Maldini and Leonardo, that was not just a disagreement over a name. It felt like a direct challenge to their authority.
They did not stop there. When Pirlo was ruled out, they tried to shift the discussion towards Thiago Motta, fresh from his work with Bologna and previously Juventus. Again, they hit a wall. Malagò declined that proposal as well, according to multiple reports.
Every path they tried to open was closed from above.
Conte and Mancini: options they would not accept
Monday brought a final, tense meeting between Maldini, Leonardo and Malagò. The FIGC president attempted to steer them towards other high-profile candidates, above all Conte and Mancini.
On paper, both names carry weight. Mancini, the man who delivered Euro 2020. Conte, a serial club winner and former Azzurri coach. But Maldini and Leonardo were not interested in reputations alone.
They argued that Mancini’s return would carry the same credibility issues they believed critics would raise with Pirlo. Mancini had resigned in the middle of the Euro 2024 qualifying campaign in 2023, then swiftly accepted the Saudi Arabia national team job. For Maldini and Leonardo, that exit left a mark. Bringing him back now, they felt, would reopen old wounds and invite the same questions about loyalty and continuity.
Conte, in their eyes, posed a different kind of risk. His history of short cycles, changing clubs roughly every two years, clashed with the long-term project they had in mind. With the 2030 World Cup still four years away, they feared appointing Conte would mean another upheaval before the tournament even arrived.
The divide was clear. Malagò wanted Mancini or Conte on the table. Maldini and Leonardo refused to bend.
Autonomy vs. control
When Malagò rejected Pirlo over political concerns and pushed back against Thiago Motta, Maldini and Leonardo saw more than a difference of opinion. They saw the erosion of the independence they believed their roles required.
For them, choosing the coach was not a detail; it was the foundation of their project. If that choice could be overruled, what was left of their mandate?
The final conversation on Monday only confirmed the fracture. Malagò tried to persuade them to abandon Pirlo and embrace other options. They stood firm. The result was inevitable: both men handed in their resignations.
In the space of a fortnight, Italy’s new technical structure collapsed.
A bench waiting for a name
While Maldini and Leonardo walk away, the FIGC moves on. Malagò is expected to confirm the new Italy coach as early as today, with the FIGC Council meeting scheduled at 12:00 CET (11:00 GMT).
The names remain the same. Conte. Mancini. Others in the background. The decision now lies entirely with the federation’s hierarchy, without the filter of Maldini’s vision or Leonardo’s counsel.
Italy will soon have a new coach. The question that lingers is sharper: at a time when the Azzurri need clarity and long-term planning, who is really shaping the future of the national team – and at what cost to those who dare to disagree?
