The two-day war, De Laurentiis withdraws from the occupied territories. The rebels win, the government returns to Ancelotti

The two-day self-harm of Napoli ended this afternoon at around 3pm with an official statement from the company. A statement that we could define as tautological: it entrusts the coach with the task of evaluating the possibility of bringing the team into retreat. In short, it gives back to the coach the full powers that for 48 hours were abruptly and ostentatiously challenged.

Aurelio De Laurentiis, in fact, at least for the moment, takes a step back. Politically, it doesn't come out very well, to put it mildly. On Monday, two days after the defeat against Roma, he announced that the team would be in retreat until Sunday. He calls it a constructive and not a punitive retreat.

What do you get?

a) After 24 hours, the public annoyance of the coach collects. We do not know if it was the first time, certainly it has not happened so many times that Ancelotti has publicly lined up against a decision of his own club. It had never happened in Naples. And we are talking about a coach who shares the club's fundamental principles. Which, unlike Antonio Conte – just to name one – has never said a word about the rose, indeed praised the company market. A coach who in Naples is looked upon with suspicion precisely because of his corporatism.

b) Makes the locker room already uneasy because of its insufficient results obtained so far in the championship. And it does so on the eve of the Champions League game that could give the qualification to the knockout stages with two rounds of advance. It therefore puts at risk one of the main goals of the season: the turn of the round and the entry of Napoli among the first sixteen teams in Europe.

c) It causes what is probably the first real media revolt of a team against its own club. A locker room is not remembered, the protagonist of a similar mutiny. Yes, in Naples, in 1988 we had the revolt against Bianchi. Similar but not exactly the same.

d) After the mutiny, he is forced to accept the refusal of the players, and to get back in the hands of the coach. It does so in a statement referring to possible legal actions against the mutineers of Castel Volturno. Press release which however sanctions the rebels' victory.

is) Deliver the Naples to a media forum of which one would have gladly done without, given that a few days before, companies, coaches and players had launched – compact – a political battle for the arbitration wrongs suffered. It is as if De Laurentiis had launched the following message: "we joked, the referees have nothing to do, Napoli is bad for internal reasons". Not really a brilliant political move. Always to stay with the rhetorical figure of euphemism.

f) Wanting, and to find at least one positive aspect, De Laurentiis has suddenly gained acclaim among the fans. The attack more or less direct to the millionaire players always gives, at least, ten percentage points. More or less like the promise to reduce taxes at the last second election campaign.

In reality, there would also be another positive aspect. The release of De Laurentiis has – we do not know how voluntarily, if this were the case it would have been a brilliant one – produced two effects that are difficult to reach: has compacted the team and above all induced the players to come out into the open and take on responsibility. They made themselves the protagonists of a resounding gesture – disobedience to a corporate order – and now they must assume all the consequences. And he also joined the team and coach who, even in recent weeks, had been the protagonists of disagreements (even think of the Insigne bench in Genk). Returning to the positive consequences – voluntary or involuntary – has also given an enemy to the group that perhaps in this way makes more and better. As also happened after the famous Madrid show.

If we exclude having wanted to rebuild the locker room and the relationship between the team and the coach, the reasons that led De Laurentiis to a lightning war that could have had sporting dramatic consequences in case of internal defeat last night with Salzburg remain mysterious. Napoli could have played a game in serenity and maybe even celebrate the turn of the day yesterday. Fortunately, the damage was limited. A draw remains a good result after the victory in Austria.

Now it is up to the team to demonstrate on the field how much it is worth, and it is up to the coach to take them to do more with the methods he considers most suitable. There is also the version according to which Ancelotti would no longer have the protection of society. But even here evaluations should be made. Napoli thinks and works exclusively for the good of Naples. And it's really hard to think of finding a coach who can take over and improve Ancelotti's performance. Frankly, this is a risk that De Laurentiis is not left with – for the writer – a model president, the unquestionable maker of the miracle-Naples.

There would also be another aspect to be probed, this time more psychoanalytic. Why does De Laurentiis at one point feel the irrepressible need to ruin relationships with his coaches? It is as if he were devoured by a demon of destruction. Probably after the bad performance in Rome he got scared. But he would have to wait. He uselessly exposed Napoli to a media fool, he did not bring home the knockout stages in the Champions League, he got the first public rift between himself and the coach. What else? George Clooney would say. Fortunately, Aurelio De Laurentiis is an entrepreneur and does not do politics.