I know people will point to the league table and to that shocking defeat at Newcastle, and that is fair enough. But has King Kenny worked any miracles in his two games in charge at Liverpool? Did Big Al help Newcastle two seasons ago? Did replacing Brown help Hull? Did sacking Hart save Portsmouth? Did a change of manager, enforced admittedly, save Burnley? The three clubs who went down last season ALL changed their managers during the season. Might there not be a message here?
Tell me, how long do you think O'Neill will last working for Sullivan and Brady? How long before he takes umbrage at a Brady newspaper article or a Sullivan email? How long before he throws his toys out of the pram, has a hissy fit and buggers off muttering that it was the wrong move for him?
Don't get me wrong, I rate the guy. I would have given him the Liverpool job if it was in my power and I had any love for the Reds. I think he did a fantastic job at Villa and that their struggles this season are attributable more to the loss of O'Neill than to the loss of Milner. But is he the right man for West Ham under Sullivan, Gold and Brady? A match and gunpowder comes to mind!
Our club is riven. Poor Grant inherited a mess and a reservoir of hatred because he replaced the absurdly popular Zola. A sizable proportion of our fans have been desperate for Avram to fail. They don't like the man, they don't like the way Zola was treated and they don't like Jews. Yes, antisemitism is unquestionably a factor here.
And even before he has been appointed, factions are appearing in relation to O'Neill. I don't hold with the view that he is a route one exponent, I see him as a Pardew type tactician - fast, direct, counter attacking football. His Villa teams always entertained me, but there is a lobby claiming he does not play the game the West Ham way.
Will O'Neill save us if appointed? Maybe. Would Grant save us if he stayed? Maybe. Are we more likely to survive under O'Neill? Probably. Will O'Neill hang around for long? I doubt it. Could O'Neill have had the job earlier? Probably. Has he been reluctant to take on the role? Probably. Does this bode well? No. Will we be more United under O'Neill? Very, very unlikely indeed.
Big London derby, and the Boards are full of Avram's imminent dismissal. Welcome to West Ham Disunited Martin.
47 comments:
Can't agree with you regarding O'Neill's style (just my opinion) all I've ever seen from his teams is long ball football. No question that he is a great motivator but his football is dire and is only a couple of notches above Allardyce.
Can't wait to see him blow most of the transfer budget on getting Reo-Coker back.
The law of Sod says that we will get a result against Arsenal today but other than that I generally agree with your article. Antisemitism? You may be right I don't know. I'm not anti jewish but I'm fervently anti-Isreali and I did not enjoy seeing Isreali flags in the crowed recently.
As far as I'm concerned Grant was the wrong man but has been treated apallingly, but then what can you expect from a pair of classless prats like Gold and Sullivan.
You see, first post makes my point, and I'm not having a go at you 1212. When was the last time a manager was appointed with the full backing of the fans? Grant? Certainly not! Zola? Ex Chelsea and too inexperienced. Curbishley? Small club route one mentality. Pardew? Short of the necessary experience and not Brooking. Roeder? Don't make me laugh! Redknapp? Knifed Billy Bonds in the back. Billy Bonds? Yeah! Good old Billy!
Regarding your "point" HF; when did 100,000 people ever agree on anything? How do you think bookmakers make such a good living?
O'Neill IS what Grant IS NOT and could never be. A good motivator and most importantly knows how to put a winning team together. Don't start talking about hate campaigns and anti-semitism and all that jazz. West Ham fans (true West Ham fans I mean) don't care about all that. They only care about what is good for their beloved club. And even you admit that we probably have a better chance of staying up with O'Neill at the wheel than we do with Grant. I rest my case. I just hope the rumours are true and that this will happen even if we beat Arsenal today.
How have they acted any differently from other Booards Marty? Look at how Levy treated Jol but look at where Spurs are now. Did Liverpool treat Hodgson any differently? Newcastle Hughton? Blackburn Allardyce? Man City Hughes? Bolton Megson?
Sullivan and Gold also inherited an absolute mess. They aint angels but they are not the devils some would make them out to be. Not based on what they have done so far anyway.
But again Marty, you prove my point. West Ham is a club intent on tearing itself apart. The fans are factionalised in an incredible way. Look at the hatred voiced through the Boards, for the owners, some of the players, the management and for each other. Grant has tried to keep a steady hand on the tiller throughout and has shown huge dignity in my book. Will O'Neill keep his cool?
There will never be unanimous support for any new appointment at any club, however I don't see O'Neill as the messiah figure that many have held him up to be. His record in the transfer market for starters is pretty dire. Paying extraordinary amounts for garbage like Reo-Coker, Downing, Heskey, Harewood whilst releasing the likes of Gary Cahill, Routledge, Shorey, not rating and wanting to get rid of Bannan, hardly playing any youth players instead wasting copious amounts on journeymen whilst leading Villa to lose huge amounts of money, yet walking out like a petulant child the day before the season opener because the board there wanted to reign in on his reckless spending.
What happens to our youth academy players, Sears, Stanislas, Nouble, Tomkins, Hines, Brown? We will never see these players again, coupled with his anti-football (as described by Rijkard and Wenger)and it's hardly West Ham anymore.
anti-Isreali, you can't even spell the name of the country you claim to be "anti" you moron.
Grant should have stayed with Pompey.
Yes Marty, but when did an organisation so obviously tearing itself apart ever succeed? We won't always agree on anything but there is a terrible invective, a bitter hatred, that has taken hold. There are now clear factions and these factions would rather we lose so they can be proved right, than we succeed and they be proved wrong. They refuse to give ground from their position and refuse to acknowledge anything that doesn't fit their argument. Zola never failed, the Board failed. Grant has failed, the Board aren't to blame. How can those two arguments be reconciled?
Me? I feel sympathy for Grant. I rate O'Neill. I won't say replacing Grant with O'Neill is right or wrong, because I don't know the answer. Zola had to go. Grant? It is far too early to say.
Gollivan didn't "inherit" anything. They bought a business opportunity which will see them benefitting from the re-development of the Boleyn and West Ham fans watching matches in an overlarge stadium with Opera glasses!
I think that stabilty in the dressing room leads to consistancy on the pitch and we should give a manager time, sir alex nearly got the sack in his first year at the scum of manchester but look at the success he has had. as for the style of o'neill it ain't how we play at west ham, we are a football club and should play football not rugby kickinbg the ball 40 or 50 yards to some big lone forward. we want to see attractive football on the floor i know we are no barcalona but this is our beliefs and we should stick by them because at the end of the day that is who we are and how we got here today
They invested in a company on the very brink of administration and potentially saved OUR club from a Pompey style melt down. You know the damage was done long before the Davids arrived. Look at what they did at Birmingham. Yes they turned a profit but they also took Birmingham into the C21st and built a healthy club before selling on. It is not in their interest to destroy the West Ham brand. We may not like their vision - and I am against the move to the Olympic Stadium too - but they have a vision. And that vision does not GUARANTEE that they turn a tasty profit. I really do believe Gold is a fan of the football club.
agree with your article. I rate O'Neill as a coach but he wouldn't last long at West Ham under our very special circumstances - the board.
Grant had a tough job to take over, Zola always seemed nice and was very emotional on the touch line. You don't see Avram too often smiling nor celebrating but he's a very friendly and nice person indeed. After Zola's dismissial many supporters were upset about S&G's behaviour so the board's newly appointed manager already was a bit foredoomed.
HF 12:35 I agree with you but isn't that what is generally mis-interpreted as "passion" in football? ps Why is it that whenever I make a comment the idiots seem to crawl out of the keyboard? I made a typographical error but the "put-down" is laughable!
Old pals from the Org perhaps?
The issue goes deeper I fear. There was always the yob element - the ICF - but the bulk of West Ham fans were more balanced in their attitudes. Expectations were not too high. Entertainment was demanded, a good Cup run was hoped for, but providing we felt that the players were trying, that the club was respecting traditions and the manager was "one of our own", then we were relatively content. Appointing Macari was the first crack in the dam. Bonds and Redknapp put a finger in the hole but after the departure of 'Arry, the club has lost contact with its heritage. Sure 'Arry was dodgy but we are East End and the whole bloody East End is dodgy. We shoould have stuck with Redknapp. We would have kept Lampard for a year or two longer, he would have built a proper team and we would not now be in this mess. Our loss was Tottenham's gain.
And now we have become the new Tottenham, firing managers left, right and centre. Let's say O'Neill brings in three players. We will have a team then including players signed by Pardew, Curbishley, Zola, Grant and O'Neill. How can that reflect planning?
Anti-Semitism!?!?! you are as absurd as you are ridiculous. I've been to seven home games this season and have not seen one jot of what you claim, what is your theory based on?
The ICF was run by a black man - which kind of makes a mockery of your racist claims......
Oh well HF - hope you'll be gracious enough to now admit you were wrong.
I wish Avram well, the general opinion seems to be that the nature and timing of this decision lacks dignity and class, I agree, although lets notforget the pressure that SuGo must be under, Grant was their choice, and they do have a proven record of having long term loyalty to Managers, so they probably did not do this lightly - there are two sides to a story and then there is what happened! We need to be open minded and focussed in terms of whats happening now. They have simply recognised that they made a poor decision, held on to give him a chance allied to the fact that the fans and table position have provided the context that has led to todays events. Also true, a new Manager should have been appointed possibly before the Brum match, but that was prob due to negotiations dragging. I believe he was not the right man for West Ham, I dont even think he is frontline Manager material, this was a mismatch of competencies and not just styles or personalities and required correction.
Regarding MON, if true, he is a big name, I am happy to have him in, mainly on the basis that he would only come on board if
1313, wrong about what? If he is sacked now, I can never be proved wrong. Our recent results, the newcastle game apart, have been good. He will not be leaving on the back of a terrible run, he will be handing over a team with one foot in Wembley and a points total from recent games that puts us in the top half of the "Current form" table in the Prem! If O'Neill capitalises on thiis, who is to say Grant wouldn't have done? If O'Neill fails, the sacking of Grant will look very, very stupid. Zola failed over 2 years. Grant hasn't had enough time to turn things around in my opinion. But if the decision is made, and O'Neill is appointed, I will back him 100%.
I am totally sure that sacking AG and appointing O'Neill is the right move for West Ham. But I won't believe it until it happens. We already had (about an hour ago) someone from the West Ham Board denying it! I don't much care about HF's statistics and whether he is right or not in blindly supporting Grant. It is a none issue not worth discussing.
My statistics? I have invented our Cup run and the current form table for the Premier League have I? What you mean Sav is that you don't care about the facts, you only care about your own prejudice against Grant.
Very strange going ons in the Board Room at Upton Park recently. Not the traditional West Ham way and hardly dignified.
If the rumours are right you have to feel sorry for Grant. I thought the team and tactics (4-3-2-1) were spot on for the B'rum game. Two changes for todays game? Bridge at lb and Upson to replace Reid at cb. Stanislas or Hines for Obinna.
The writing was probably on the wall for Grant after the Newcastle debacle and he has been left in limbo until a replacement can be found. To confuse matters he has done well since, but we are still bottom of the pile.
Ultimately the club need to improve. Wayne Bridge was a positive step at left back earlier this week. I wonder who made that decision?
Likewise Martin O'Neill would be a big coup for the club. He is a top manager and would not be out of place at say Liverpool or Chelsea. One would expect him to want a decent transfer kitty to take up the challenge so another good sign perhaps? With O'Neill at the helm we can be pretty sure he will have the final say on transfers and I would predict our chances of survival are much improved.
Tactics wise his teams feature a big centre forward, but the style is certainly not restricted to long balls. It would be good to see the likes of Young, Downing, Milner etc working the flanks and getting proper crosses into the box.
I am sorry for Grant and the way he has been treated but relacing him with O'Neill would be a very positive step. O,Neill is an emotional chap and I would have thought he would be welcomed by most fans with open arms.
Whilst I agree with the appointment as we have rarely played well under Grant, the way Grant's removal has played out has been crass. To do it now is highly unprofessional and stupid. It should have happened ages ago.
They did a similar thing in how they sacked Zola, but worse. Good appointment, but we should continue to worry with these classless chavs running our club.
Seemed to me it was Sullivan Vs Gold, with Gold supporting Grant. Then the recent issue with Brady meant Brady took Sullivan's side, and may have even brought Gold to question his Grant loyalties. It was thus sealed.
At least we may have players want to sign for us now, as O'Neil is a much bigger attraction.
...and HF was wrong of course. Happy days.
You are almost right there HF. I don't give a damn about Grant. I only care what happens to West Ham. I am not willing to gamble whether we stay up or not with Grant as coach (or even whether you are right or not). This is all I am saying. West Ham stands a much better chance of staying up with O'Neill as manager and that's all that matters now.
Hi Stani, good to see you back mate.
And as far as your "statistics" are concerned Stani hit the nail on the head with that when he quoted to you G. C. Lichtenberg's
"The most dangerous untruths are truths slightly distorted".
"West Ham stands a much better chance of staying up with O'Neill as manager and that's all that matters now". How the hell do you know that?
You are right.I have slightly distorted our recent results and our progress in the League Cup. It is also unfair to claim that 13 players have been unavailable to start recent games!
1429, opinions are facts for some people. And when they are presented with facts, they quote back opinions such as G. C. Lichtenberg's to counter them!
All these teams you mention have replaced their managers with inferior compared to ONeill. Liverpool, Newcastle, Hull, Portsmouth and Burnley. There is no argument regarding his managerial credentials I just worry about his transfer targets (Coker, Harewood anyone) and him getting on with the board. In fact I'm surprised he has taken the job at all because he knows what they are like unless Brady has offered him a welcome handjob.
He hasn't taken the job yet of course! As for Brady, if I was O'Neill, I would write bubbles along my best mate and ask her to pay due tribute to the club's anthem!
HF,
Unfinished business, that's all mate. It's always nice to prove you wrong so I have to return now and again to collect the dues. Can't let you get off that easily. Then I'll vanish.
Sav,
HF makes a lot of 'innocent' mistakes doesn't he? :) He's fan of Orwell and I'm certain having been excited by some of Orwell's brilliant, thought provoking writings, HF likes to engage in a bit of hanky-panky with the less sharp people who come here. I'm sure it's fun for him.
TBI,
That's the point. We have a better manager now, the other teams did not necessarily.
But all business remains unfinished Stani. As I say above, if Grant goes now, nothing is proven. Blackpool have just taken the lead against West Brom. The Baggies are falling apart.
The most important fact you are ignoring is that we are bottom of League and with only 3 wins in 22 games! What are other facts are more important than this?!!!
I'll give you a few more:
1. Is Grant a good motivator? - No
2. Can Grant select and organise a stable team - No (Very recent proof: Newcastle 5 - West Ham 0).
3. Is any other manager a better manager than Grant? - Yes, because almost everyone who has managed a Premier League team before has a better record than Grant.
That is how I know that O'Neill can do better than Grant 14:29.
Sav (14:24)
Quite. "There are lies, damned lies and statistics".
The league table indicates we are at the very bottom and in serious relegation trouble. The statistics also indicate that the bottom team at Xmas usually gets relegated.
HF of course just chooses to quote a selective part of the overall statistics to further his cause. The Newcastle performance which was perhaps one of the worst in living memory features in his "population sample" but is conveniently brushed under the carpet.
Well done to Grant on the cup successes but a day at Wembley will not compensate for championship football next year.
I'm not sweeping anything under the carpet. I would rate the Liverpool defeat as one of the worst in living memory too, and the Liverpool defeat under Zola last season, and the home defeat to Wolves too last season under Zola, and the 2-2 draw against Sunderland last season after being 2-0 up with the Black Cats down to 10 men, and the defeat away to Fulham 3 days before they played the biggest game in their history last season, and the home draw against 10 man Fulham last season when they were reduced to 10 men in the first half, and the 4-0 defeat to Bolton under Pardew, and the 6-0 defeat to Reading under Curbishley and the three consecutive 4-0 hammerings under Curbishley and the 4-0 defeat to Charlton under Curbishley...
Didn't O'Neill's Villa ship six or seven at Chelsea last season?
HF,
Nope. You are supporting nothing but your own stubbornness mate. You chose to back Grant hoping to be right and laugh at the rest of us. It went pear shaped, but you've come too far. You know exactly what we know about Grant. No credentials, took pompey down and was about to take us down. Has no eye for a player and tactically inept. He has only had jobs in English football because of favours...for whichever reason.
He was Gold and Sullivan's man...their man!. They have realised their mistake, so you cannot tell me you have not come around! You're a brighter guy than them.
It seems even Grant will have doubts about himself, before you do about him.
Tactically inept against Birmingham? Seems to have seen something in Spector that Zola never saw. And indeed in Sears. Seems to have found a way to get Tomkins playing too. Perhaps whilst you are here, you would like to comment on Noble's performance against Birmingham?
No worries.
Grant: One game makes him a tactical genius? Come on mate, did you see him in our other games. Did you see him against Newcastle? We have changed coaches, and the Chairmen said we'd get others, because of Grant's ineptness.
Both the Sears and Spector moves were forced. They were not through choice. If they were then he would have recalled Sears earlier, and played Spector in midfield earlier, if he had seen something
Noble: Be realistic mate. He had one good run and the goal he scored was full of defensive errors and never should have gone in. His shot and Cole's shot were both keeper mistakes. In fact, it was the same mistake, one which Foster makes a lot. He 'goes' early, whether it's a dive (Cole) or going down (Noble), he went too early. Defender in front of him or not, he stands up he gets it. But this is irrelevant. The stats prove that if we play Noble, we will not get enough points to survive. It is clear.
15:33 there's no answer to this from HF - because he can't answer it - welcome back Stani - I'm glad you're back - he gets nowhere when you're around - you only have to look at his ludicrous response to your post.
"You are supporting nothing but your own stubbornness" classic!
1616, we haven't replaced him yet and O'Neill has won a game yet. Keep that in mind!
Stani, I suspect he was Gold's man. I suspect Sullivan went along with it. I suspect Brady was never a Grant supporter. I suspect that may well be an issue for O'Neill and anybody else who comes in. It is one thing keeping one Chairman happy, quite another thing to satisfy the whims of three egotists!
With reagrd to Noble, let's see if O'Neill plays him shall we? If he does, what will that tell you?
HF (15:31)
Ok - there have been some other poor performances in the past but we are dealing with the present.
In August you surprised me with your expectations of Europa league football under Avram. I know there has been some bad luck since then, (for instance the departure of Diamanti and the Hitz. injury) but surely that can't explain the difference between 6th place and 20th place.
The current squad has under performed even by your own expectations. I can think of a handful of good performances this season. Spurs in the league and Man U and Brum in the cup for example. If the team can be fired up for these "big games" then we need someone who can get the best out of them on a more regular basis. 4 wins out of a possible 22 is simply not good enough.
Anyway good luck to Avram and the team against Arsenal.
Thats a fair point 1633, but I usually start a season full of optimism. Let's face it, as West Ham fans, as soon as the season starts, it tends to be pretty depressing!
I think some bad luck is a huge understatement. The injury list has been huge all season.
Well I'm not a West Ham fan but found this discussion interesting.
Just thought I'll share this,
Avram Grant (39.2%) has a better win percentage in the Premier League than Martin O'Neill (37.5%)
Of course a lot of that comes from his Chelsea days. Since leaving them Grant only managed 19%.
My prediction as a neutral observer, West Ham will go down if they get O'Neill, might survive with Grant.
Post a Comment