NO ONE is going to have an easy time on FA Cup final day trying to rein back the galloping worship of Ruud Gullit as a marvellous manager bringing unbridled success to Chelsea in his first season as manager.

But in an age when image too often counts for more than ability, it is necessary to strip away the awe in which most of the country still hold one the world's greatest players, the ultra cool dread locked facade and nuggets of soccer wisdom delivered as if from Mount Olympus, and see what substance lies behind the style.

For instance, when Gullit says "Even if we lost the cup final, this will still be a successful season," is that true or just what he wants his admirers to believe?

In many ways it is true. Sixth is Chelsea's highest league position in years while Gullit's unique ability to attract, through his reputation, the likes of Gianluca Vialli, Gianfranco Zola, Roberto Di Matteo and Frank Leboeuf to Stamford Bridge has given supporters back the glamour club they lost to post1970s mediocrity.

But in some respects, has it really been a successful season? Why did this team of great players fail to win a UEFA Cup place? Would they even be in the FA Cup final if it was not for referee Mike Reid who awarded a controversial penalty during the Leicester replay? What on earth is going on with Vialli?

Then there is Gullit's judgment. Having stunningly won at Manchester United in the game before Zola's arrival in November Chelsea's successful formation was thrown into chaos for five games trying to accommodate the little Italian. By the time Gullit had realised his original plan of playing Vialli, Mark Hughes and Zola together was not working, a confused team had dropped 12 points.

In the end it was not even Gullit's insight that got them out of their tactical twist, but Vialli's injury which revealed the chemistry of Hughes and Zola.

There are other question marks over Gullit's judgment. When Dmitri Kharine was ruled out for the season with injury, the manager signed Froda Grodas, hardly the consistently solid goalkeeper a top side requires.

Having also unluckily lost Mike Duberry to long term injury and knowing Leboeuf's failings as a marker, Gullit then resisted playing a tall defender such as Erland Johnsen in favour of the smaller Steve Clarke and Frank Sinclair, which may explain why the team conceded so many goals in the air from set plays.

Of course, Gullit is still learning the job. So is Alex Ferguson. But what the Manchester United manager will never do is criticise his players in public. However, when the £1 million a year Vialli began to moan about being left out, Gullit joined in the public spat, calling him a moaner and a jinx.

It followed other showdowns with Dennis Wise, Gavin Peacock and John Spencer and seemed a messy way to do business. The latter two left as a result, prompting Spencer to offer a dark insight into Gullit's mind. Perhaps Gullit was not overly worried about upsetting fringe players, but to take on a mega stars like Vialli must have sent a chill message through the squad that the new manager meant business.

It will be interesting to see how the players react to Gullit's street wise Amsterdam bluntness if the team starts losing, but for now everyone has fallen into line.

There are other areas where Gullit has made his mark. Hughes, for instance, has been given a new lease of life by not having to chase full backs all the time. Leboeuf praises Gullit's personal knowledge for improving him as a sweeper, Clarke applauds him because "if your manager appears to be laid back about the game it rubs off on the players".

Gullit has also improved the team's overall fitness, done well in assimilating the contrasting needs of foreigners and locals and despite all the overseas stars, given debuts to six home grown players and three from the youth team.

He has even improved on his tactics: his unexpected switch from 3-5-2 to 4-4-2 for the Cup semi final caught Wimbledon out completely.

With the squad already enlarged, the signs look promising for next season. But judgment on Gullit the manager must be reserved. It is not that the jury is out; it is still hearing the evidence.