Jose Mourinho's war with the media and the football authorities - and war is the kind of word the Chelsea manager would use to describe it - is for effect. It is to tell his players that he is fighting for them, that they are in a battle with a world that is against them - and that because of that they had better not let slip their seven-point lead over Manchester City at the top of the Premier League. It is what the world wants to happen, he will be telling them.
Mourinho is in default mode. It is not petulance and to think it is would be to do him a gross disservice. He is not that unprofessional. Instead he is deploying one of his big weapons. This is how it can be. This is how he can be. This is how he can behave - because it might just give him and his players an edge.
This is why he cancels press conferences; why he claims there is a "campaign" against Chelsea; why he calls out a particular pundit; why he walks out on a TV interview; why he warns journalists that they had better not pursue a line of questioning; why he suggests they are failing in their jobs; why he suggests they have targeted a particular player to try and get him banned.
Quizzed about his players' discipline after an incident against Everton in which Branislav Ivanovic pushed his head into James McCarthy's back (and which the Football Association investigated but did not charge over), Mourinho walks out, before returning to complete the interview.
Mourinho did not walk out when asked by the Match of the Day reporter, having ironically praised the BBC previously for their acceptable line of questioning as he reopened his war front with Sky Sports, because he was truly angry, but because it looked dramatic. It made good TV.
It will be played in a loop - not least at Chelsea's Cobham training ground. Everyone at the club will see it. The players will see who he fights for - them - and how far he will go to win that fight - all the way. So do they not need to go as far for him to win their matches at this vital time of the season?
It is why he walked out before a Champions League tie away to Steaua Bucharest during the last campaign. Not because he was struggling under the pressure, not because there was any meltdown or crisis but simply because he wanted to get a response, he wanted greater focus, from his players. And he got it.
It is not just the players he wants to get that response from. His approach is also aimed squarely at the Chelsea supporters. Mourinho has complained about the lack of atmosphere at Stamford Bridge, about how they are outsung by visiting fans - so how better to whip up a response than to convince those fans that the world is against them? You only had to listen to the chant aimed at Frank Lampard's cousin - otherwise known as Jamie Redknapp, the Sky pundit - during Chelsea's recent game against City.
When the FA delivered its three-match ban on Diego Costa for his 'stamp' - he maintained he only trod accidentally - on Liverpool's Emre Can then the 'notifications' on the organisation's social media feed were off the scale with angry Chelsea supporters.
Chelsea are now clear at the head of the Premier League table. They should win the league. But they have already seen an eight-point advantage over City swallowed up this season. It can happen again. Furthermore, with nine games to go last season Chelsea had another seven-point lead, over Liverpool, and a nine-point lead over City albeit having played a game more than Liverpool and three games more than City.
Even so, their run-in did not look daunting: yet they lost to Aston Villa, Crystal Palace and Sunderland and drew against Norwich City.
By then, though, Mourinho had already accomplished another brilliant piece of PR - propaganda even - in convincing everyone that Chelsea not only could not win the title but never stood a chance against the might of City. If City had failed? It would have been unacceptable, given the advantages they held over his "little horse", he said.
It was all nonsense even if Mourinho was right in railing against the imbalance of the squad he had, and the lack of an attacking threat. But that was a situation of Chelsea's - not City's - making.
Chelsea created 32 chances in losing 2-1 at home to Sunderland and took just one of them. Away to Stoke City, another defeat, Mourinho had made it clear his strikers were not good enough. Against Palace he wrote on a reporter's notepad that his team lacked "balls".
They received those cojones last summer. In came Costa, Cesc Fabregas, Filipe Luis and Thibaut Courtois to add to last January's signing of Nemanja Matic. A new spine was created. The team were given those balls.
So now there is no excuse. Mourinho knows that. He still rails against the advantage and injustices which City benefit from - again last week he returned to his theme of Financial Fair Play, even suggesting a club that breached the rules should be stripped of their title. At the same time Mourinho conveniently forgets how much he and Chelsea have benefited from the benefactor investment model.
He goes on about FFP and "economic sharks" and so on because it is another weapon he can use - and he knows that it is one that City react to. Manuel Pellegrini is a cool customer, not easily ruffled, in control of what he says but ask him about Mourinho and it is almost a Pavlovian response.
The beauty of it is that Mourinho is not simply being ridiculous either. He has a point. He always does - because he is smart, thinks it through and can argue his corner.
The coverage of the Costa 'stamp' was over the top, the fact that Arsene Wenger escaped punishment when he shoved Mourinho was wrong; if a Chelsea player had flung his arm into James Tomkins' face as Robin van Persie did last Sunday then, yes, he might well have faced a violent conduct charge.
But it is how Mourinho then ramps it up. There is simply no holding back and the difference this time at Chelsea, as opposed to the last time he managed the club, is that he has their full support in his stance.
Last time one of the breaking points for Mourinho was that he perceived he was not sufficiently backed by Chelsea when Uefa found him guilty of bringing the game into disrepute. Mourinho felt Chelsea did not fight his corner well enough - something he had never been accused of failing to do.
Chelsea are anxious for that kind of schism not to repeat itself and there are no signs that it will. The club are a more cohesive, far less political environment than they have ever been under Roman Abramovich.
But Mourinho will be anxious also. And here is the rub. He will be anxious to deliver trophies this season after not winning one in the last campaign.
He cannot countenance a campaign without silverware. It is why, with the Champions League restarting next week (opponents Paris St-Germain can also expect a questioning FFP comment) and the Capital One Cup final coming soon, this Portuguese man-of-war has gone into combat mode.