Paolo Maldini Resigns as Italy's Technical Director
Paolo Maldini’s return to the heart of Italian football lasted barely long enough to leave a mark on the office door.
Two weeks after being appointed Italy’s technical director, the former Azzurri captain walked away on Monday, joined by his advisor Leonardo, after a dramatic clash with FIGC powerbrokers over who should lead the national team into the next cycle.
At the centre of the storm: Andrea Pirlo, Roberto Mancini, Antonio Conte and Thiago Motta. And, above all, who really calls the shots in Coverciano.
A Short Reign, A Sharp Break
Maldini arrived with a clear idea of how Italy should move forward. He wanted Pirlo. The FIGC did not.
The federation, under pressure over Pirlo’s role as a brand ambassador for a Russian betting company and the political backlash that came with it, refused to sign off on his appointment. For Maldini and Leonardo, that was the first red flag. Not about Pirlo’s profile as a coach, but about their own authority.
They pushed back. If not Pirlo, then at least a project they believed in.
Motta Rejected, Conte and Mancini Pushed
According to multiple reports, Maldini and Leonardo tried to steer the conversation towards Thiago Motta, fresh from his impressive work with Bologna and previously Juventus-bound. For them, Motta represented a modern, long-term choice, aligned with their vision.
That proposal also hit a wall.
FIGC president Giovanni Malagò, facing his own political and institutional pressures, resisted. In a final meeting on Monday, he urged Maldini and Leonardo to drop the Pirlo idea and instead consider two names the federation viewed as safer and more established: Mancini and Conte.
The message was clear: the FIGC wanted experience, profile, and a familiar face on the bench. Maldini and Leonardo saw something else – risk.
Old Wounds and Short Cycles
Their objection to Mancini was not about his tactical acumen. It was about trust.
Mancini resigned in the middle of Italy’s Euro 2024 qualifying campaign in 2023, leaving abruptly to take charge of Saudi Arabia just weeks later. For Maldini and Leonardo, going back to him would reopen the same concerns that were being used against Pirlo: credibility, consistency, and the political optics of recent decisions.
Conte raised a different kind of alarm. His track record is littered with intensity, short cycles and explosive exits. Two years here, two years there, trophies and tension in equal measure. With the 2030 World Cup four years away, Maldini and Leonardo viewed Conte as a gamble for a project that demanded continuity, not another reset in 24 months.
They wanted stability. The FIGC wanted a big name now.
Power, Autonomy and a Line in the Sand
When Malagò declined Pirlo on political grounds and dismissed Motta as an alternative, the rift became unbridgeable.
From Maldini and Leonardo’s perspective, this was no longer just a debate about tactics or profiles. It was a question of autonomy. If their primary choices could be overruled for reasons beyond football, what exactly was their role?
The final conversation with Malagò did not soften that feeling. The president tried to pull them away from Pirlo and towards Conte and Mancini. They stood their ground. The federation stood its own.
By Monday, there was only one outcome left. Maldini resigned. Leonardo followed.
A Vacancy and a Statement
The FIGC Council meets at 12:00 CET, with Malagò expected to confirm Italy’s new coach. The timing underlines the urgency: the Azzurri need a leader, and they need him now.
But the departure of Maldini and Leonardo sends a message that will echo beyond the appointment itself. Two figures brought in to shape Italy’s future have chosen to walk rather than rubber-stamp a decision they did not believe in.
Italy will soon know the name of its next coach. The bigger question is whether the structure around him will allow the kind of long-term project Maldini fought for – or whether this was the last stand of a vision that never truly got started.
