Not sure any of the players agree with me, but I was quite pleased to read David Sullivan's email last Wednesday - the night after the worst West Ham performance since a cold and unforgiving New Year's Day at the Madejski stadium. The less I remember about that day the better.
Irrespective of the arguments over whether the chairman should voice his opinions so publicly, he's bang on the money. We were atrocious, we did let Wolves appear far better than they actually are (which is still better than us), there is no cohesion, it was something to apologise for, we're not a good team.
The owners ought to stay away from the training ground and shouldn't try to influence team selection. It never helps. But it's hard not to sympathise that these two West Ham fans invest their money only to watch Faubert, Daprela and Mido do their best to cock up their best laid plans. There's talk about too much pressure being applied but if you ask me, if you can't handle pressure, you're not a West Ham player. In 16 years, I can't think of one season when pressure hasn't stalked us through every game - people usually cope with it.
Saturday is possibly the day that confirms our survival or demise, and we have to beat a team who would rather do anything than play football properly. West Ham only know how to play football properly - in short, it's the sort of game we lose. Then again, the team is at its best with stinging criticism still ringing in their ears, they reach new heights when they are accused of having nothing more to give.
What does this lead to? A draw - and the assurance that we will sweat every second through to the last day of the season. We wouldn't have it any other way.
Friday, 26 March 2010
Saturday, 20 March 2010
Time for gung ho Hammers
I've defended managers this season who have effectively thrown difficult fixtures by playing a weakened team, and I stand by it. Bugger the rules, you play to your strengths and if you're Wolves away to Man United, there's only so much you can hope for.
Last week, however, felt very different. West Ham lined up against Chelsea with undoubtedly our two best forwards, Cole and Diamanti, on the bench. Injured? No. Out of form? No. Writing off a difficult fixture? Definitely.
The difference between the two cases (and I'm aware of how this sounds) is that we are West Ham. We have a time-honoured tradition of getting points when we have absolutely no right to, and during our last relegation fight proved this with wins at Arsenal and United. Would we have got those 6 points with Stanislas coming off the bench instead of Diamanti? No. And Zola needs to remember this for today's trip to the Emirates.
With 9 games left, we have four winnable home games (Wigan, Wolves, Sunderland, Stoke) which would give us a maximum of 39 points. Enough to survive? I wouldn't bet on it. Therefore we have to look at the other five games: Man City at home, and Arsenal, Everton, Fulham and Liverpool away. Sodding difficult, and it may yet spell our doom, particularly if we slip up in one or more of the home games. But the point is this - we can do any of those sides, and frequently do when we're at our best. I predict that we'll need at least a couple of points from the 5 tougher games in order to stay up. So let's start today.
Arsenal is a fixture every West Ham fan looks forward to, because they go into in believing they can win. 3-2 at Highbury comes to mind, 1-0 at the Emirates, Marlon Harewood's last minute winner, this season's 2-2 draw after being 2-0 down. Today is another big chance, despite Arsenal's irresistible form, to get something off them. And if we maintain the tempo that we normally keep against the gunners, I think we'll scrape something.
Or maybe not. But one thing's for certain - there is no excuse for not having a go. If we play our first team, which is the best starting eleven in the bottom half of the league, we will stay up. Those are the rules. The West Ham rules.
Last week, however, felt very different. West Ham lined up against Chelsea with undoubtedly our two best forwards, Cole and Diamanti, on the bench. Injured? No. Out of form? No. Writing off a difficult fixture? Definitely.
The difference between the two cases (and I'm aware of how this sounds) is that we are West Ham. We have a time-honoured tradition of getting points when we have absolutely no right to, and during our last relegation fight proved this with wins at Arsenal and United. Would we have got those 6 points with Stanislas coming off the bench instead of Diamanti? No. And Zola needs to remember this for today's trip to the Emirates.
With 9 games left, we have four winnable home games (Wigan, Wolves, Sunderland, Stoke) which would give us a maximum of 39 points. Enough to survive? I wouldn't bet on it. Therefore we have to look at the other five games: Man City at home, and Arsenal, Everton, Fulham and Liverpool away. Sodding difficult, and it may yet spell our doom, particularly if we slip up in one or more of the home games. But the point is this - we can do any of those sides, and frequently do when we're at our best. I predict that we'll need at least a couple of points from the 5 tougher games in order to stay up. So let's start today.
Arsenal is a fixture every West Ham fan looks forward to, because they go into in believing they can win. 3-2 at Highbury comes to mind, 1-0 at the Emirates, Marlon Harewood's last minute winner, this season's 2-2 draw after being 2-0 down. Today is another big chance, despite Arsenal's irresistible form, to get something off them. And if we maintain the tempo that we normally keep against the gunners, I think we'll scrape something.
Or maybe not. But one thing's for certain - there is no excuse for not having a go. If we play our first team, which is the best starting eleven in the bottom half of the league, we will stay up. Those are the rules. The West Ham rules.
Wednesday, 17 March 2010
Why Hull have doubts over Dowie
Iain Dowie can't understand why Hull fans have reacted with a mixture of concern, scepticism or even anger at his appointment. Really, Iain, you have no clue? Well I'm going to help you out.
My head nearly exploded when Hull's great white saviour said, with no hint of irony, "I think my record's alright". Right, did he not expect people to check? Or remember?
His record in the Premiership:
Palace - Relegated
Charlton - Sacked after 15 games, having won just two
Newcastle (as Shearer's assistant) - Relegated
His best record is at Palace, where he won 50 in 123. His best result, beating West Ham in the championship play-off final. And you only got that result, Iain, because Pardew saw fit to bring on Don Hutchison in place of a striker and our defence forgot to mark Neil Shipperley.
Since that day, Dowie has courted failure. He can't help it. He has infuriated and insulted almost every club he has been involved with, and managed under 80 games while in charge of three clubs. He spent 2 million pounds on Djimi Traore. He came up with the word 'bouncebackability'. For God's sake.
Hull have nine games left to save their season, and their new manager has won nine Premiership games as a manager. Ever. Phil Brown was definitely in too deep, but why any club sees fit to make changes like this so late in the season is beyond me. Mourinho couldn't save Hull, let alone the man who was upstaged by Les Reed.
My head nearly exploded when Hull's great white saviour said, with no hint of irony, "I think my record's alright". Right, did he not expect people to check? Or remember?
His record in the Premiership:
Palace - Relegated
Charlton - Sacked after 15 games, having won just two
Newcastle (as Shearer's assistant) - Relegated
His best record is at Palace, where he won 50 in 123. His best result, beating West Ham in the championship play-off final. And you only got that result, Iain, because Pardew saw fit to bring on Don Hutchison in place of a striker and our defence forgot to mark Neil Shipperley.
Since that day, Dowie has courted failure. He can't help it. He has infuriated and insulted almost every club he has been involved with, and managed under 80 games while in charge of three clubs. He spent 2 million pounds on Djimi Traore. He came up with the word 'bouncebackability'. For God's sake.
Hull have nine games left to save their season, and their new manager has won nine Premiership games as a manager. Ever. Phil Brown was definitely in too deep, but why any club sees fit to make changes like this so late in the season is beyond me. Mourinho couldn't save Hull, let alone the man who was upstaged by Les Reed.
Monday, 15 March 2010
Becks footing the bill for LA move
Not much more of a depressing sight is there, a grown man sitting on the ground crying over broken dreams and the real prospect of premature retirement. He even had a cut under his eye.
David Beckham won't become the first English player to appear at four World Cups, and as much as his injury is probably down to plain bad luck, he did himself no favours by signing up for a schedule of non-stop competitive football over the last two years. Moving to LA Galaxy meant Beckham would always have to take a loan in Europe in order to prove himself worthy of an England place. In short he made a decision that's ruined what could have been the crowning glory of an incredible career.
Beckham moved to LA for a few reasons; money, PR, merchandise and (a very distant last) a feeling that he was out of the England picture for good. He must have known he would be back in the squad as soon as he'd scored his first free kick against Chivas or Red Bull Jazz. If he was just looking for a comfortable, slower league, he should've gone to Serie A. It ain't that different to the MLS.
Inevitably, the lure of playing for another of the world's greatest clubs took its toll and he found himself playing 6 months at Milan followed by 6 months at Galaxy. Ridiculous. For someone who takes their fitness so seriously, and has suffered injuries at the last two World Cups, why at 34 would you push your body to the limit and not give yourself any time off? Hardly leaves your achilles tendons in the best possible shape.
It's still bloody hard luck, and the three sides Beckham represents will miss him. But it cannot be disputed that he made this situation a far greater probability through a far-too-heavy workload. Why didn't he just stay at Milan? Because he made a load of speeches about helping Americans embrace football, and wasn't prepared to admit he had made a mistake.
The sad truth is that, unlike 2002, Beckham's errors will hurt him far more than it will the national side.
David Beckham won't become the first English player to appear at four World Cups, and as much as his injury is probably down to plain bad luck, he did himself no favours by signing up for a schedule of non-stop competitive football over the last two years. Moving to LA Galaxy meant Beckham would always have to take a loan in Europe in order to prove himself worthy of an England place. In short he made a decision that's ruined what could have been the crowning glory of an incredible career.
Beckham moved to LA for a few reasons; money, PR, merchandise and (a very distant last) a feeling that he was out of the England picture for good. He must have known he would be back in the squad as soon as he'd scored his first free kick against Chivas or Red Bull Jazz. If he was just looking for a comfortable, slower league, he should've gone to Serie A. It ain't that different to the MLS.
Inevitably, the lure of playing for another of the world's greatest clubs took its toll and he found himself playing 6 months at Milan followed by 6 months at Galaxy. Ridiculous. For someone who takes their fitness so seriously, and has suffered injuries at the last two World Cups, why at 34 would you push your body to the limit and not give yourself any time off? Hardly leaves your achilles tendons in the best possible shape.
It's still bloody hard luck, and the three sides Beckham represents will miss him. But it cannot be disputed that he made this situation a far greater probability through a far-too-heavy workload. Why didn't he just stay at Milan? Because he made a load of speeches about helping Americans embrace football, and wasn't prepared to admit he had made a mistake.
The sad truth is that, unlike 2002, Beckham's errors will hurt him far more than it will the national side.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)