Monday 18 January 2010

Why would we want to save Zola exactly?


Our Tory friend Iain Dale has set up a petition to save Zola from the sack; like anybody taking over the club will take any notice of that! Sullivan and Gold have proved already that they don't give a toss what the fans think and Don Cellino sacks two managers every season so won't see the dismissal of his old mate as any big deal. I suspect Duxbury is behind all this anyway, floating scare stories to try to swing the fans behind his preferred choice, Fernandes. He knows his card is marked if the two Davids take control and it is nailed on that the Don will bring in his own heavies. They like to keep it in the family in Italy! I may be wrong, but I suspect Intermarket are out of the running.

But let's say that the rumours are true, my question is why we would want to keep Zola anyway? On his own admission, he has struggled, whilst Clarke has as good as said that the job is too big for the Italian. I know people will talk about the mess Zola has had to cope with, but a lot of the problems are of his own making. He has accepted the role of the nodding dog in the back of Duxbury's car and has failed to stand up for the players and the fans when a strong manager was needed. Remember, Zola said he wanted to work with a smaller squad, so he can hardly complain when a few injuries decimate his team. Remember, he agreed to the sale of Collins, the release of Neill and Di Michelle, and to the signing of Jimenez. If he agreed to a contract that gives him no say whatsoever about who is bought and sold, then he is a complete fool and so deserves the push. Remember, Zola said he had had no contact with Ashton and was looking forward to him returning from injury, even after the Mirror told the world that Ashton had retired! If Zola swallowed that nonsense from Duxbury as the excuse for not signing another striker, then again you have to say he is a fool.

Then we come to tactics and Zola's pig headed stupidity in playing a 4-5-1 system that the players clearly could not cope with. His win to games played ratio is awful - worse than Pardew's, worse than Redknapp's, worse than Curbishley's and yes, worse than Glenn Roeder's. He is officially the worst manager in living memory based on games won to games played. But he plays the game the West Ham way! Were you watching on Sunday when our only ambition was to keep a clean sheet?

So tell me, apart from him being a nice guy, why would anybody want to keep him? In Zola we trust? Look where it has got us: we were fourth in the Prem when Curbishley walked; we are now fifth from bottom. Sign a petition to keep him? Why not build your own gallows whilst you are about it?

34 comments:

Stani Army said...

HF,
I think Zola deserves a chance under better circumstances.

We get rid of him and Clarke then who do we bring in?

I wouldn't sack him just yet.

Hammersfan said...

Mark Hughes? Alan Curbishley? Gary Megson? George Graham? Sven Goran? Rafa? Glenn Hoddle? Terry Venables? Huddink? Slaven Bilic? Martin Jol? Who would you fancy Stani?

Anonymous said...

The Rod has well and truly been cast here .. . . don't raise to it

Hammersfan said...

You what 1947?

Anonymous said...

This is just Fishing for reaction, Yawn

Hammersfan said...

Is it? Caught you then. Mind you, I'm tossing you back again because you're not worth keeping. What a waste of a good maggot!

Gunwharf Hammer said...

All this talk of Mark Hughes comming in for Zola is pathetic. He got a team speding a quater of a billion 1 place above us last year. If he takes over us he'll have a quater of a million to spend, whats he gunna do with with that. Won't be able to buy the beano let alone Robinho! Zola deserves more time!

Savvakis said...

It all depends how much ambition (and money) the one who buys West Ham has. So, let's wait until this resolved (hopefully before the end of January) and then we can consider who drives this ship. For some owners none of the above mentioned managers are good enough. For others (for example those that are in this to make money) then any one from the above are good enough. I suspect we all know which two prospective buyers fall in the latter category.

Hammersfan said...

Gun Wharf as in Wapping High Street?

Anonymous said...

I started to read this blog as i thought it was a bit different, a bit light hearted at times. In actual fact it appears to be purely designed to get reactions. I'm not even sure these are your own thoughts. We are all entitled to our opinons but I shant bother any longer with someone who writes crap purely for the reaction. I'm not even sure you know enough about "the West Ham" way to even beging casting views about it.

Gunwharf Hammer said...

No gunwharf quays in prtsmouth....

Dave D said...

I would have liked Zola to have been able to buy & sell and thus judge his savy in the transfer market.

But I must say that I have lost faith in him, For a manager to not stand up for what is right & fight for what we as a team need is just a sign of weakness that we cannot have at the club.

If you were a player & you were to see your manager not fighting for you & your team mates, then why would you have faith/respect for him, you would just turn up & pick up yours wages & bide your time until another team comes along & jump ship (look at all of the rumours- these come from the players agents)

Look at the nigel quashie situation!

The poor sod was told not to come to training as he was not needed,
Now I am not his biggest fan, infact I would have sold him a long time ago, but it is human nature to think "what if that was me" would I be treated in the same way? and that is not taking into account the fact that he was/is friends with a good number of the squad.

Put yourself in one of our squad's shoe's how would you view a manager who did not have a
back bone?

I say get him out ASAP.

Anonymous said...

hammers fan you are a tosser

Dave D said...

And another thing,

If I had my way I would keep zola & clarke but only as first team coach's & bring in a manager who knows how to lead.

Deane said...

got to keep him if just for stability I also believe he is a good coach and that's the role he was brought in for I don't believe he was ever hired to be the manager Duxbury and Nani do that job The only person that needs to go is the bottom feeding shark that is Duxbury the sooner anyone connected with the Brown era leaves the club the better (and lets hope nobody who has ever been connected with him is allowed into West Ham again)

Deane said...

only Huddink out of that list I'm afraid hf, the first 4 I wouldn't want to see anywhere near the club the next 2 only work with lots of money Glenn is almost as touched as me Venables? I'd rather have Big Ron. Bilic runs on national pride and prem players on money, so not a good mix and Martin Jol might be able but....... but hey decision left to me I'd hire Paulo

Anonymous said...

Drivel - total drivel - I think you're a deeply unhappy and sad man - I've read your posts for the last week and it's all bitter and twisted.

I shall not be back - even the Tory makes better reading than this nonsense and that's saying something

Deane said...

PS I signed the petition first time I've ever voted tory

The Real Tom Hanks said...

That is the picture of you that all the Klan have in their dreams!!!

Fonzie's Bald Patch said...

Injuries, constant asset stripping, player retirement, stabbings, Gabbidon being mental/having teeth/spine problems, Keiron Dyer, no money, useless scouts, over reliance on kids, Duxbury coming round his place and eating all his bbq food...
Yeah Zola, not only being a Chelsea Chimp and always smiling, is a useless twat of the highest order and should go.
Straight away.
Yesterday in fact as punishment for Green' poor performance ;)

Hammersfan said...

One thing's for sure, Duxbury will knife him if he thinks that will please the new owners - and it won't matter a jot whether it is the right decision or not!

Hammersfan said...

By the way guys, I wasn't the one who started the rumour that Zola will be sacked, I'm simply responding to it!

Stani Army said...

Come on HF, be serious. Most of them wouldn't come to us and if they did, it would be for the wrong r£a$on$.

Alan Curbishley and Gary Megson!?!? You really don't rate Zola do you HF :)

I'd keep Zola and Clarke for now.

I'd get rid of Duxbury and Nani. Let Zola have a bit of money and spend it himself. Then we judge him.

Anonymous said...

i have finally decided ... this blog is crap ! it must be run by a child who is purely looking for attnention and a reaction. Tell me one thing me "author" in your opinion are you saying that we have never had a good manager ? Cos you appear to be slaggin off everybody....

Hotshot C said...

IT'S OFFICIAL THE 2 DAVID PORN KINGS OWN THE CLUB!!!!!!!

Anonymous said...

No its not.

Hammersfan said...

I don't think I have criticised Greenwood, Lyall or Pardew! I've just said Zola's win to games played ratio is the worst in living memory. I have not endorsed any of the options as an alternative manager either! But I would have Huddink!

Fonzie's Bald Patch said...

The two Davids are now owners and Brady will chair.
Duckers, don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.
A celebratory shandy HF or shall we get started on the next regime?
BRADY OUT!
lol

MelbourneHammer said...

1.37 Anonymous, to quote a famous Kenneth Wolstenholme line "it is now"

Anonymous said...

Melbourne you've tried to be too clever too quick
"No it's not" they only own half

Fonzie's Bald Patch said...

Is this the reason the blog is quiet today?

"Scott Duxbury has stood down as West Ham's chief executive, BBC Sport understands, with Sullivan and Brady taking over the day-to-day running of the club."
lol

Hotshot C said...

(anonymous) Oh yes it is.. Oh no it's not...
The davids have a controlling share so as good as own it, and are now creating the agenda for the club now..
Thought originally would be a bad move, but they are going to invest, want a larger stadium, champions league football (sounds familiar?), and most importantly they have some football management experience.

Hammersfan said...

Fingers crossed Chris! Can't be worse than C&B Holdings retaining control surely?

Anonymous said...

Hotshot riChardhead - no they don't. They only have 50% not a controlling 51% share as you so ill-informedly put it. Now research, if you can, why they were specifically NOT given the controlling share, what CB Holding still have and WHO has the rest. Don't get involved in a debate you know nothing about, it only serves to make you look as stupid as you so obviously are