Hammers Offer Neill A New Contract

It's being reported that because of the appearance fee of more than US$1 million for their participation in the Barclay’s Asia Trophy this summer, West Ham are able to offer Lucas Neill an improved offer. If this is the case, then this is all Lucas would need to save face and re-join the Hammers.

Further to this, the extra coffers are believed to have allowed West Ham to table a loan bid for Barcelona striker Eidur Gudjohnsen.

Ginger - any leaked confirmations please??

Ashton, Bellamy and Claret

Some blogs are tossing around the idea that Deano is contemplating leaving West Ham simply because he absent from the pre-season fixtures and training session in Austria: Faubert is present, so is Davenport. Apparently they are surplus to Zola's requirements and are leaving; therefore, I fail to see the connection between being in Austria and your future status as a West Ham player. If Dean Ashton is guilty of anything, then it's being a little too silent on his current fitness level; however, he certainly wasn't fit at the tail end of last season as indicated on some blogs.

I'd rather believe Deano's own comments on his fitness and commitment to West Ham...; however, I can see the rationalization for selling him if the offer is double digit millions, if only to get his wages off our chest and to acquire a cheaper but fit alternative...Mancini? Is this what is stalling our Mancini acquisition; after all, if we had Ashton off our books, then we could offer Mancini a better contract...

Bellamy is rumoured (by the Daily Mail - hence I can't say "reported" because they are not really a newspaper) to be likely to leave Manchester City for Sunderland. Apparently, since City have acquired Tevez and likely Arsenal's Emmanuel Adebayor, 30 year old Craig Bellamy won't be likely to see much action. That and he is still recovering from leg injury acquired against West Ham late last season. Karma: you can't beat it. 14 million quid: justice is truly poetic.

Ginger, you bugger, you were right on the money with your "leaked kit". It's certainly a big departure for us, but I guess I can get used to it; it certainly can't be any worse than last year's kit with the white rectangle on it. I'll purchase it, if only to support the WHUFC coffers; after all, that's part of what being a fan is all about.

Zola Speaks

Looking at this interview with Gianfraco after West Ham's victory at Grays Athletic today, I was interested to his reactions to a couple of questions. In particular, looking at his facial expressions, his movements, and listening to what he actually says, it's clear that:

West Ham want Lucas back, but Lucas has to accept the previously tabled offer: Lucas Neill probably won't be back.

Faubert and Davenport don't want to be at the club: "If they can fit in our team, they're welcome..." is hardly a ringing edorsement of the players and a strong indication that it is unlikely we'll see them back.

Eider Gudjohnsen is a target for Zola,

Lies, Damn Lies and Leaks

I'm sure everyone has seen pictures of the supposed new kit by now, apparently leaked to Football Shirt Culture by an enigmatic and taciturn gent called "Ginger"... Not his Jamesness, one assumes. And while I was initially sceptical of the lack of blue, now, I'm not so sure...

However, an appraisal of the kit's stylistic merits isn't really the point of this post - perhaps I'll do one later on that. It's an interesting exercise in journalistic judgement to evaluate the validity of this "story" before it breaks:

Is this a hoax, furtively proffered by shrewish sh1t disturber known as Ginger? Or is is this a bona-fide, one-hundred percent genuine leak right from the depths of Ray Winston's armpits?

All will be revealed, no doubt, by Ray himself and West Ham on Monday, but will it be this kit?

On the "Yes" side we have a very professional rendering. It contains accurate sponsorship and badge logos. While all of this is possible on Photoshop, it is difficult to render such an accurate image, but not impossible. Moreover, another feather in the "Yes" camp's cap is that last season there were several occasions when the referee wasn't happy with the choice between the Home and Away kit. Against Aston Villa at Villa Park, we played in our first strip, while Villa came out in the second kit because the ref felt that our second kit didn't contrast enough with Villa's first kit.

Now our 08-09 Away kit has been superseded by a radical and very stylish dark blue and uniquely single striped Away kit. So doesn't it behoove us to believe that the Home kit will be similarly...unique? Perhaps, most telling, our 2009-2010 kit doesn't have a lick of claret on it. Logically, Spock would deduce that the new Home kit has a high probability of having little or no blue present...

And look at the tracksuit and warm up kits - completely light blue and white...no claret.

Moreover, for the yes side, Burnley's away kit is white, and that's not a problem, but their new 2009-10 Home kit is very similar to our traditional claret and blue kit bar the socks (as was Villa's kit last year):

This could be confusing for all those Asian, American and Villa fans who can't really tell the difference between teams; consequently, with three Claret and Blue teams in the PL, something has to give...perhaps it's our kit.

But perhaps the best evidence that this may, indeed, be the THE new Home kit is in the shorts. It's subtle, to be sure, but look at the claret flashes on the sides. Now look at the away kit at the light blue flashes on the sides of the both the white away shorts and the blue away shorts. Notice the similarity to the "Leaked Kit" above?

Ahh, but hold your horses. Not so fast: while, admittedly, it is easy to be sceptical of "leaks" and treat them as lies, damn lies or hoaxes, there are a number of elements in this story that lend some balance to the "Hoax" side of the argument.

Firstly, one would expect Burnley of all the claret and blue teams in the PL, with their moniker of "The Clarets" and not the "Claret and Blues" like the Hammers, might be somewhat miffed at this "Leaked Kit" being so claret dominated. Surely they would have a preference for such a claret dominated kit, as might the Premier League and F.A. The supposed WHUFC socks could be construed as confusing for casual Premier League TV audiences: rather than a light blue ring around the sock, wouldn't the traditional solid white with a claret ring or solid blue be better to contrast with Burnley? Both kits have white shorts; would a light blue for West Ham be better if we go with a solid claret shirt like that?

While West Ham and Burnley have very different Away kits, Villa have had to come up with a "Third kit" as their second Away kit (white) looks very like Burnley's Away kit (also white). Villa's latest 2009-10 kit hasn't yet been revealed, but the fact that they have come with a third kit, suggest their home kit could be very similar to West Ham's and Burnley's, and perhaps that lends credence that West Ham's true Home kit will have more blue on it, like Burnley's.

Historically, West Ham shirts have always been Claret and Blue: sometimes more blue, sometimes more Claret, but always a mixture of the two, sometimes with some white thrown in for good measure. Never have we been so totally dominated by Claret as this supposedly new kit. If you haven't already done so, click on this link and notice that cheekily, the "leaked" kit has been included as the latest installment/illustration in the historical diagram of West Ham kits through the ages...But also notice, again, no WHUFC home kit has ever been so dominated by Claret as compared to blue and or white.

I suppose only time and Ray will tell. However, the last clue maybe simply that Ray is wearing a completely claret "kit" or tee shirt in the reveal advertisement...Yes, as you can tell, my fingers are scrabbling to keep me from falling off the fence onto the Hoax side of the equation...

Monday awaits, and perhaps, on the merits of this "leak", I'll be purchasing the Away kit!

One Down...

With Bowyer finally being offloaded on a free to Birmingham (he had to accept reduced wages in order for Birmingham to offer him a contract), West Ham have finally started to trim the dead-wood from the squad. Bowyer, Davenport, Faubert, Quashie, and perhaps Spector and Morte - all players bought in under the reigns of Pards and Curbs - are the players that need to be offloaded to make the squad more manageable and effective. Their departures will lighten the wage bill and bring in the much needed coffers to bolster the acquisitions of more strikers and attacking midfielders.

There's no doubt, apart from the last three games of the season, our defence and midfield were solid. Our Achilles heel, and the Spud's saving grace, was our poor goal-scoring record. With Ashton and Cole injured for vast chunks of the season, we had to rely on two "more mature" and less pacey players, or the inexperienced Sears. The result was a goal difference that never looked promising.

While Spector had a great final against Brazil working like a trojan to break up many Brazilian moves, now the dust has settled, retrospectively Spector's performance had the feel of a once-in-a-lifetime-all-or-nothing-cup-finalesque-adrenaline go-for-broke-career-high personal best. I have never seen Spec's put that sort of performance in for West Ham. With Neill still negotiating, and Gabbidon, Collins, Behrami, Tomkins, Ngala, Collison etal waiting in the wings, I just can't see the need for another defender of defensive midfielder like Spector.

Davenport? While, he doesn't want to play for the hammers, he hasn't exactly torn the premier league apart with his performances during his loan to Sunderland has he?

Quashie, while, like Gabbidon, I fully appreciate his near career ending injury crisis, he doesn't have Gabbidon's record or potential; I see Quashie as a championship player in a team with aspirations for promotion, rather than a team aspiring for the Europa League.

LBM: he played out of his skin last season, finally getting the monkey off his back and putting in some fabulously hard working performances; however, he didn't score and made few goals. I think as a bench warmer at West Ham he has potential, but not as a starting eleven player.

Faubert? What an enigma. When I saw him in Toronto during the pre-season, he looked fabulous, in particular, his mazy runs and crosses were stunning. Something happened, and he seemed to lose his touch, his work ethic, and any sense of motivation as the season wore on; consequently, his performances and opportunities suffered. He just wasn't satisfied with being a team player: he seemed to want to be the lynch pin about which which the team was built; however, the gulf between his high opinion of himself and his performances got ever wider. Faubert's over-inflated opinion of himself didn't "harmonize" with that of the management around him or his own performances on the pitch. His move to Real must have seemed like vindication for his ego; what, after all, did West Ham know about world-class players: look at Mascherano? Unfortunately - or fortunately - depending on your point of view, Faubert was found out, and got a grand total of 8 minutes playing time for Real. Now he's back at West Ham, and it's evident that from Duxbury's comments that Zola and Clarke have no use for him.

Perhaps Real weren't big enough, perhaps they just didn't meet Faubert's expectations. Perhaps Mr. Duxbury could make an exception and sell him to a truly big team, like the Spuds?

Pre-Season Means A New Season

Pre-season training starts today, and various West Ham players will start arriving at the training ground to have their fitness assessed. There has been a lot of speculation and not many firm answers regarding which players will be returning and which won't. While I don't like fueling the flames of speculation, I think it is fair to comment on the status of some players I feel are important to the club:

Lucas Neill. According to Duxbury in his interview with Iain Dale, Neill was a West Ham player until July 1st. He has until July 6th, today, to sign and accept the terms of a new contract-which was offered to him after the last match of the season. He hasn't done so, so one must speculate that Lucas is focused on a future elsewhere. I completely understand both sides' point of view: Duxbury is being prudent in refusing to continue the ridiculously over-inflated Egg-style contracts; rather he is offering a contract that still puts Neill on a par with the best paid senior players at West Ham. Neill, I suppose, can't really be blamed for refusing to take a pay cut, especially after playing some of the finest football of his career last season.

However, Lucas, it's apparent you haven't had any better offers; it's also apparent that you both enjoyed your football under Zola and had a great season last year: c'mon, swallow and sign. We need you as much as you need us.

Dean Ashton: while Stoke may have made contact with Deano, I'm sure that he would have nothing to do with that, for obvious reasons. Dean knows that he has something to prove at West Ham: he's a great player with incredible potential. There's no doubt Zola wants him to stay; I don't buy those rumours of him refusing to play for us at the tail-end of last season either.

One thing I will say, Dean, is it's time for you trust the new medical department at Upton Park and dispense with the private physio's you employ: it's apparent that, at best, they haven't exactly speeded your long-term recovery, and, at worst, may have jeopardised your long term fitness and alienated you from the team. Time to get back to being a grafter.

Rob Green: My mother, Mrs Baker, taught him at Horsell Junior School - even taught him some soccer skills, apparently - hopefully he's completely erased those from his memory banks! "He's a lovely boy, bright and hardworking," she says. She follows his progress every week, and being married to a rabid West Ham fan, was delighted when we signed him from Norwich.

So, while you're the best keeper in England and could move anywhere, Rob, you have three years left on your contract, (and the ball is in Duxbury's court), and you deserve the raise to put you on par with the Upson's, Neill's and Parkers, it'd break me old mum's heart if you left us. No pressure, Rob: just be patient and you'll get your just rewards. Duxbury knows which side his bread is buttered on.

Matty Upson: Matty hasn't been in a rush to sit down and talk with West Ham yet. But why should he? He has two years on a lucrative contract with us; we also have potential. Now the papers will have you believe that is because he is looking for a Champions League berth next season. Even if this is true, it isn't all bad news: he won't move to City because finishing below us did not get them into Europe either; we won't let Matty go for anything under 15 million and none of the "big four" are going to spend that on a 30 year old: Arsene is too cheap; Senior Benitez doesn't have the funds; United are only in the market for Bosmans; and Chelsea...who's going to step aside...Terry? Cole? Carvalho? Ivanovic? Ferreira? Boswinger?...

I suppose he might go, but he has the look of the faithful dog, no disrespect, Matty.

West Ham in Negotiations With Barcelona...

Over at Iain Dale's West Ham Till I Die blog, Iain is publishing the notes from his June 26th interview with West Ham Chief Executive Officer Scott Duxbury. The following line, courtesy of Iain Dale's interview, leapt out at me as significant, given the rumours that are flying around right now:

Do you think that your comparative youth in running a club like West Ham means that people haven’t taken you as seriously as you might have liked them to?

"...I think especially after the last year and a half I am taken seriously. We are negotiating CEOs of Inter Milan, Barcelona. We are on a very very high stage..."

Barcelona, like Zola and West Ham believe in a small squad; in fact, Barcelona only have 23 players, I believe Zola's plan is for the same number. Zola is looking for three players, one of which, a right winger, we have purchased (Jimenez) from Inter Milan. He is also looking for a couple of forwards. If one looks at the Barcelona squad list, among others, one Eidur Smari Gudjohnsen, a centre forward of ex-Chelsea renown pops up. Given that he was only a substitute in the recent CL final against Manchester United, one has to assume that he is looking for first team football...

You know where I’m going, don’t you? Frankly, I hope I'm wrong.

On another note, Scott Duxbury sounds like an honest man, with a vision and a solid business plan: The Project. I must say he impresses me with his optimism and clear goals. He's obviously passionate about the club, and, to a large degree, his impetus and support of Zola and Nani is responsible for our current vein of form and confidence.

Keep it up, Scott: you deserve recognition for bringing West Ham into the 21^st century. Traditionally, the club has been a shambles: poorly run and financed by people with no vision other than to survive by hanging their hopes on one or two players. You deserve credit for helping to build a club structure and ethos that incorporates the trinity of long term objectives, attractive football and, hopefully, success.

I’ll buy into that.

Tevez, Joorabchian, and June 31st?

Yes, it's loosely related to West Ham, being a Tevez story. Now we have a new saga: Tevez is leaving Manchester United because he was/wasn't offered a contract in time and it is/isn't about money, and two/three teams are in the running for him: City, Chelsea and "one other un-named club"...

Joorabchian surely is a piece, isn't he? I feel sorry for Carlos: his contract being owned by such a blood-sucking vampire. I'm sure Carlos had no say in the United contract and would rather stay; Joorabchian would have turned it down because 50% of 25 million isn't what he considers a big enough slice of the pie. And despite Carlos Tevez saying that he wouldn't go to Liverpool because such a move would be tantamount to treason given the historic rivalry between them and United, apparently going to City isn't bound by the same conventions... So you can be sure Tevez is off to City, where money is no object and Joorabchian will get his pound of flesh.

What made me chuckle was Joorabchian's assertion that

..."The contract with United officially runs to until June 31 and we'll
respect that. After July 1, we'll see. We may be defined in 10 days."

As much as I enjoyed Tevez's stay at West Ham, given Joorabchian's penchant for infecting everything he touches with a malignant odour that results in the kiss of death for all concerned, twined with his pathetic lack of basic knowledge of the Gregorian calendar, I surely hope West Ham aren't the 3rd team involved in negotiations with the vampire...we can only end up losers twice around...

Buy Jimenez?!

As predicted on this blog (well before most others had the temerity, foresight, wit and, perhaps, the reckless abandon for strict journalistic integrity!), Luis Jimenez has signed for West Ham. The details appear to be, as widely speculated, a loan period of a season from Inter with first refusal on a permanent contract at the end of it. Others have been outspoken in their luke-warm affinity for loan deals, but I favour them for the same reason Zola does.

Since the new scouting network led by Nani has been in place, we've seen the number of successful signings and acquisitions ratio go up to a staggering 50% success rate. Half of our player acquisitions have been successful; that is, they have integrated into the side and become, if not home favourites, then very close candidates for Hammer of the Year because of their commitment, ability, and style: Ilunga, Behrami, and to a lesser degree, Savio. However, whenever the player has been a gamble, we have signed them as a loaner for a while: Di Michele, Tristan, Kovac etc. This test-drive is an idea, especially if the player is injury prone, older, or playing in a new league for the first time, which is Jimenez's case is a perfect option for us.

Jimenez is a gamble. Given his checkered personal history (courtesy of Trilby), perhaps this probationary period is wise move. If anyone can get the best out of Jimenez, then it's Zola. He obviously has seen something he likes, and given a fair crack of the whip over a full season, who knows, perhaps Luis will bear fruit.

And if Jimenez doesn't? Well that's the nice thing about a loan isn't it?

It's just a pity the Curbishley/Egg team didn't employ the same tactic with one Julien Faubert.