West Ham’s suffering is good – for poor journalism!

We’ve become used to a poor press over the years. It’s almost like water off a duck’s back. Granted, the end of last season was an uncomfortable time for us long-serving Hammers as previously indifferent journos fell over themselves to heap praise on a side that surprised everyone by finishing in the top half and gracing a none-too-shabby FA Cup Final.

However, even that sort of press was usually tinged with some sort of snidey comment to the effect that a few months previously the entire population of E13 had been chanting “Pardew Out”. They hadn’t of course – even at its lowest ebb polls on kumb.com suggested that the silent majority were behind Pardew – but hey that would ruin a good story or worse still actually require someone to research what they were writing.

And of course everyone’s got an opinion on the Tevez/Mascherano signing. BubblyMickey’s recent article in “caughtoffside.com” was another in an ever-growing series of ill-informed “opinion” pieces. Mickey falls into the trap of assuming that the failure of the two Argentinians to settle in is the major cause of all our ills:

“For West Ham, however, a season that started with the kind of media hype and promise that most clubs will never experience, has gone horribly wrong.” “the reasons for West Ham’s pre-season excitement – the “permanently signed” Argies, the dodgy Iranian, the potential Chelskification – all epitomise the rather unfortunate way football is going”.

Well it’s a nice story but even at its most basic level it falls apart. Given that the season was the thick end of a month old by the time the pair actually arrived, anyone who had pre-season excitement over the signings of Tevez and Mascherano would have had to have been psychic – I wish I’d known – my local bookie would have been flogging the Big Issue by now.

Whilst it’s nice and easy to blame the bedding-in time taken by the Argentinian pair for the club’s current league position, there are a number of other factors which were affecting performances even before they arrived. Early injuries to the likes of Gabbidon, Ferdinand, Mears, Bowyer, Paintsil and, probably most importantly, Dean Ashton have all disrupted a side which last season had been unusually fortunate on the fitness front. A simultaneous loss of form by certain players, notably the likes of Nigel Reo-Coker and Paul Konchesky has also played a significant part in seeing the team at the wrong end of the table. These reasons are all very dull but, let’s face it, they’re not particularly sexy to write about.

Then there’s the “Chelskification” factor – the idea that we would go down the same route as the West London mob. When people talk about Chelskification they tend to make two rather large - and basically false – assumptions. Firstly the theory assumes that Abrahamovic-levels of cash would be made available to the club. Although a decent cash injection (and by West Ham standards I’m looking at anything over a fiver here) would no doubt arise following a takeover, the financial clout of those rumoured to be involved mean that running a multi-million pound defecit of Stamford Bridge proportions would be most unlikely. We’d just have the same sort of money that most teams in the league seem to be able to muster.

Secondly, there is the implication that that the nature of the club’s support would suddenly “go all prawn sandwich” in the same way as Chelsea’s. This theory rather ignores the fact that the West Londoners have always had a somewhat large “luvvie” element to their following. Remember that this is a club that as long ago as the 70’s “officially” changed its nickname from “The Pensioners” because it was worried about its “image”. A Further example? Well at half time in the West Ham match at Stamford Bridge last season they paraded Pat Nevin in front of the crowd. Amazingly, few actually recognised him. Does BubblyMickey really think that, to pick a player of similar vintage, Alan Devonshire would receive a similar reception at the Boleyn?

"Gone is honest success built from a brilliant manager or carefully developed players. In their place, players brought to clubs simply as a shop window for the big boys and transfer fees going into the pockets of private investors rather than the sport itself. "

God forbid West Ham should come into any money blimey that would spell an end to all that honest success the clubs at the top work so hard to achieve. The “honest” success that, say Chelsea, have worked so hard at in recent years. After all their success has been built on the strength of their academy and it must be a complete co-incidence that their first title for 50-odd years coincided with the arrival of all that money. Or how about Arsenal who do so much to develop young, home-grown talent? Or even Man Utd who, despite producing the likes of Beckham, Scholes, Butt etc in their title-winning sides of a few years back, now seem to content to simply splash out the cash in an attempt to buy the league back. Given those were the last three sides to actually win the Premiership, it seems a little perverse to wish ill of West Ham, a club with at least a half-decent record in bringing players through the ranks. Just look at the decent players in the England squad that have passed through the hands of Tony Carr’s youth set up. And Frank Lampard.

On the one hand Mickey would deny the likes of West Ham the money to compete with the so-called bigger clubs on the grounds that he doesn’t like where the money might be coming from (something that doesn’t seem to concern him as far as Chelsea are concerned) whilst on the other hand when someone comes up with a way of getting world-class players into the club for little outlay they’re accused of somehow being responsible for “the way football is going at the moment”. It’s a little like getting pulled over by the old bill for doing 75 on a motorway when everyone else is getting away with 90+. An easy and unfair target for those who are too lazy to go after the real culprits.

“So, apologies to the suffering West Ham massive, but the sacrifice of your club’s success is one that football will thank you for in years to come.”

Ignoring for the moment the somewhat patronising tone of this comment, surely Mickey cannot really think that our failure to win a trophy or even our relegation will make a difference to the way the rest of the league develops? On the other hand if he really is that naive I know a few people who would like to sell him some genuine Rolex watches at a tenner a time. No, if we don’t get any success the Premiership will continue in exactly the same way as it has been developing for the last few years. Chelsea will keep buying the title whilst the likes of Arsenal and Man Utd spend ever-increasing amounts trying to keep up and nothing that happens to us will affect that one iota.

And finally……

“fansite kumb.com is down, possibly due to an influx of enraged visitors”

Sorry to disappoint once more. Whilst the line “hard-drive failure due to (former) hosting company incompetence” might have been more accurate it wouldn’t have made much of a story. But then it never was, was it?

* Like to share your thoughts on this article? Please visit the KUMB Forum to leave a comment.

* Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the highlighted author/s and do not necessarily represent or reflect the official policy or position of KUMB.com.


More Opinion