Sullivan out!

[Jaan Kenbrovin]

[Sir Alf]

As we all know and largely agree Sullivan is not able or willing to learn as he places his ego, need for control and doing “nice little warner” deals with his agents before anything else. A huge conflict of interest and all about the short term. The player profile and who the coach wants is second to who brokers the deal.

[kite2]

I know loads of people are writing this season off, and it's unlikely we will get relegated, so how about we spend the rest of the season making it uncomfortable for Sullivan, shine some light on him.

Would love a banner or two displayed in the ground and a chorus of Sullivan out.
 

[Lee Trundle]

They'll be a few breakdowns if Steidten does leave.

I reckon if we're replacing him with Macaulay then it will be a massive upgrade.

If we're replacing Steidten with Macauley it just goes to prove that Steidten was never 'Technical Director' and was de-facto "Head of Recruitment".

It also goes to show Sullivan has learned nothing since Pellegrini/Husillos, and is aligning recruitment to the manager and not the club, so we're no more sustainable than we've ever been.

Also, means if Potter leaves, Macauley leaves and we're then back to square 1.

Standard West Ham fucked up planning without any strategic planning whatsoever.  The sooner Sullivan is an episode with a start AND end point in our Club's history the better, because despite his departure being no guarantee of better...at least there'd be a chance.

I don't think anyone knows his real role at the club, stubbo.

He was never a Technical Director before he came here, and I'd very surprised if a team like Liverpool will be desperate for him if he does go.

[stubbo]

They'll be a few breakdowns if Steidten does leave.

I reckon if we're replacing him with Macaulay then it will be a massive upgrade.

If we're replacing Steidten with Macauley it just goes to prove that Steidten was never 'Technical Director' and was de-facto "Head of Recruitment".

It also goes to show Sullivan has learned nothing since Pellegrini/Husillos, and is aligning recruitment to the manager and not the club, so we're no more sustainable than we've ever been.

Also, means if Potter leaves, Macauley leaves and we're then back to square 1.

Standard West Ham fucked up planning without any strategic planning whatsoever.  The sooner Sullivan is an episode with a start AND end point in our Club's history the better, because despite his departure being no guarantee of better...at least there'd be a chance.

[kite2]

Yeah, the old “back hander” off the books. Good way to get some personal wealth from the club’s money.  

Insidious little man Sullivan who will go to his grave ( aka pit of fire ) trying to get a deal on funeral costs

 

Wasn't it Patson Daka who pulled out of a move to us and signed for Leicester, when he was told to use a different agent.

[Lee Trundle]

They'll be a few breakdowns if Steidten does leave.

I reckon if we're replacing him with Macaulay then it will be a massive upgrade.

[Sir Alf]

Lots of stories today that Steidten going now Macaulay has been brought in for Potter. Sullivan has been itching to ditch him since he arrived and painting him as the person who singlehandedly screwed up the last transfer window. No more impressive deal making and back to Salthouse, Silkman and Mackay as brokers / agents/ intermediaries for all transfers. Which severerely narrows the pool of players we can pursue imo

”The Sullivan Effect”

[RBshorty]

Got to call BS on the pair of them. One because it's Sullivan. And the other because all they do is go around and have temper tantrums every time something doesn't go their way.

[Sir Alf]

Yeah, the old “back hander” off the books. Good way to get some personal wealth from the club’s money.  

Insidious little man Sullivan who will go to his grave ( aka pit of fire ) trying to get a deal on funeral costs
 

[stubbo-admin]

Apologies Stubbo, i just included a reference to that C & B update. I absolutely believe Nick is right on this. It explains everything that surrounds a West Ham transfer window.  

Its not the player quality or even the deal itself but who the agents are and hence allowing Sullivan more control on agent fees etc. 

Sullivan strikes again

The only agent fees Sullivan cares about are the ones that get funnelled back in his direction.

[Sir Alf]

Apologies Stubbo, i just included a reference to that C & B update. I absolutely believe Nick is right on this. It explains everything that surrounds a West Ham transfer window.  

Its not the player quality or even the deal itself but who the agents are and hence allowing Sullivan more control on agent fees etc. 

Sullivan strikes again

[RBshorty]

We ain't getting any top talent. Or any Amazon deal. Until Dave gets his number. And that ain't happening any time soon. Unfortunately we're in for the duration.!

[Takashi Miike]

thanks for also noticing him pushing dwarf narratives, independent my backside

[stubbo]

It's pretty incredible Sullivan makes the same mistakes over and over and over again without learning his lesson.

How the fuck he's a billionaire, I'll never know.

Almost like they're no mistakes, but by design?!

When it comes to transfers, he's clearly on the take and scuppers deals he can't 'turn to his advantage' (hence the insistance on Silkman or Salthouse being an intermediary in every deal we get involved in).

Nick at C&B ran the story we have engaged an agency to do negotiations for us this window...then they bring a proposed deal to the club once all lined up.  Gonzo then today has run with the same story via his 'Senior Source'...clearly he's the latest Sullivan mouthpiece (which Nick is not).

Sounds like this agency brought a Duran deal to Sullivan (60m) and he then shit on it.  They're doing the same with Angel Gomes, and also with the "mystery big name striker" he's going on about.

Most think he's a bullshitter, but I suspect he does have links to some of the guys who aren't in the club but in the agents world....was ahead of everything on the Duran deal and he's claiming the same links on this.

Sullivan then tries to stick in his 'beneficiaries' to the presented deals, as well as the conflict of interest of asking his mates (football agents) what they think if the deal he has lined up (can imagine how that goes when it's not one of the players they have links with).

Bloke is a nasty, insidious little cսnt, and one delve into his history shows he's far far worse than just benig one of the worst owners in the league.

The Club's fans really should make a very concerted effort to make his life as uncomfortable as possible.

[Mad Ferret]

I’d love to be a lucky billionaire like Mr Sullivan.

[El Scorchio]

It's pretty incredible Sullivan makes the same mistakes over and over and over again without learning his lesson.

How the fuck he's a billionaire, I'll never know.

He's a very successful individual.

He's fluked it looking at the way he's ran us.  He must have made some lucky choices at the right time.

Even a stopped clock gets the time right twice a day.

[El Scorchio]

Daniel Storey writing on the iPaper about West Ham:

"Managerial lurches, a leadership mess, failed transfers on repeat - how do you solve a problem like West Ham?

Seven years on, what has really changed at West Ham? There is a new minority investor, Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky. But David Sullivan and Karren Brady are still there and David Gold’s 25.1 per cent ownership continues through his family trust.

West Ham hadn’t won a trophy for 38 years and hadn’t finished in the top six of the top flight for almost 20. And then West Ham did finish in the top six. And then West Ham did win a European trophy. And it ultimately meant far too little outside the joyous context of those fleeting days and nights because, before long, their club proved themselves incapable of escaping their own self-inflicted destiny.

What makes West Ham different is that this drift – which we would usually associate with passivity – combines with an eternal sense of panic. There always seems to be an emergency here, either happening or just around the corner, that leaves people at the end of their tether.

It is the repetition of this combination that causes the disengagement, because it is exhausting to be a West Ham supporter. You spend half your time wondering whether answers have been found and the other half working out who to blame for finding the wrong answers or for ignoring the questions completely. Every year becomes year zero.

Nobody on the outside can really work out who is in charge. Is it Sullivan or Kretinsky, or does Gold’s estate still hold some sway? How much influence does Brady have? If sporting director Tim Steidten is now the guiltiest party, no longer appearing at the training ground, who allowed him to make all the calls and who appointed him? He was the future not long ago.

To that we must still add the London Stadium. It is now eight-and-half years since West Ham played their first match here and, sorry, it doesn’t feel like a home. That’s as much to do with what Upton Park had that this bowl lacks: tight stands, a proximity to the players, an intense atmosphere, a sense of heritage and tradition, a deep connection to a local identity.

I don’t know if Potter is the answer to any or all of this. You don’t know if Potter is the answer to any or all of this. West Ham don’t know if Potter is the answer to any or all of this. I’m not even convinced that they know what he is: team builder, fire fighter, project manager or just the best coach who would sign up for whatever this requires?

At football clubs in rude health, the adage is that the system defines the manager; if the manager leaves the system stays true. At West Ham, the managers lurch – Allardyce to Bilic to Moyes to Pellegrini to Moyes to Lopetegui to Potter – because the system itself has no obvious blueprint or tangibility. Instead, a football club with vast opportunity chases its own tail and desperately rushes to stop everything tumbling into a black hole. It’s no way to live"

 

 

I read this the other day. it's half good, true and insightful and half sly digs and tenuous patronising twoddle.
Don;t know whether RR has edited this himself but the version I read had some more stuff in it. For instance a remark about that Burnley game noting 'The directors’ box was almost breached by an angry mob, some of whom were wearing flat caps' 
What the fuck has their headwear got to do with it?

This quote is absolutely pointless 'It is a Tuesday and I am sat in a mostly empty London Stadium an hour before kick-off'.  Show me any stadium that's even half full an hour before kick off.

How does a Nottingham forest fan claim to know what it feels like (it's exhausting) being a West Ham supporter?

There are some little truth bombs, but a lot of it comes across as sneery and patronising and looking down at not the manager or the owner, but the club and it's fans as a whole. Like a snidey Vice article poking fun at a group of people from their ivory tower of smugness.

Full version here: https://inews.co.uk/sport/football/west ... ub-3490446

[Lee Trundle]

It's pretty incredible Sullivan makes the same mistakes over and over and over again without learning his lesson.

How the fuck he's a billionaire, I'll never know.

He's a very successful individual.

He's fluked it looking at the way he's ran us.  He must have made some lucky choices at the right time.

[Mad Ferret]

It's pretty incredible Sullivan makes the same mistakes over and over and over again without learning his lesson.

How the fuck he's a billionaire, I'll never know.

He's a very successful individual.

[RootsRadical]

Daniel Storey writing on the iPaper about West Ham:

"Managerial lurches, a leadership mess, failed transfers on repeat - how do you solve a problem like West Ham?

Seven years on, what has really changed at West Ham? There is a new minority investor, Czech billionaire Daniel Kretinsky. But David Sullivan and Karren Brady are still there and David Gold’s 25.1 per cent ownership continues through his family trust.

West Ham hadn’t won a trophy for 38 years and hadn’t finished in the top six of the top flight for almost 20. And then West Ham did finish in the top six. And then West Ham did win a European trophy. And it ultimately meant far too little outside the joyous context of those fleeting days and nights because, before long, their club proved themselves incapable of escaping their own self-inflicted destiny.

What makes West Ham different is that this drift – which we would usually associate with passivity – combines with an eternal sense of panic. There always seems to be an emergency here, either happening or just around the corner, that leaves people at the end of their tether.

It is the repetition of this combination that causes the disengagement, because it is exhausting to be a West Ham supporter. You spend half your time wondering whether answers have been found and the other half working out who to blame for finding the wrong answers or for ignoring the questions completely. Every year becomes year zero.

Nobody on the outside can really work out who is in charge. Is it Sullivan or Kretinsky, or does Gold’s estate still hold some sway? How much influence does Brady have? If sporting director Tim Steidten is now the guiltiest party, no longer appearing at the training ground, who allowed him to make all the calls and who appointed him? He was the future not long ago.

To that we must still add the London Stadium. It is now eight-and-half years since West Ham played their first match here and, sorry, it doesn’t feel like a home. That’s as much to do with what Upton Park had that this bowl lacks: tight stands, a proximity to the players, an intense atmosphere, a sense of heritage and tradition, a deep connection to a local identity.

I don’t know if Potter is the answer to any or all of this. You don’t know if Potter is the answer to any or all of this. West Ham don’t know if Potter is the answer to any or all of this. I’m not even convinced that they know what he is: team builder, fire fighter, project manager or just the best coach who would sign up for whatever this requires?

At football clubs in rude health, the adage is that the system defines the manager; if the manager leaves the system stays true. At West Ham, the managers lurch – Allardyce to Bilic to Moyes to Pellegrini to Moyes to Lopetegui to Potter – because the system itself has no obvious blueprint or tangibility. Instead, a football club with vast opportunity chases its own tail and desperately rushes to stop everything tumbling into a black hole. It’s no way to live"

[Lee Trundle]

It's pretty incredible Sullivan makes the same mistakes over and over and over again without learning his lesson.

How the fuck he's a billionaire, I'll never know.

[El Scorchio]

Horror reading isn't it. Actually a comparison with some other clubs would be really interesting. In terms of raw numbers it might be a net defecit for several, but you do of course have to factor in what the player did for the club while they were there so it adds more complexity. For instance if Man City let Haaland go on a free in 10 years they'll have made a 'loss' on him but fucking hell will he have been worth it in terms of his play. You can't really say that for any of our top 15 aside from possibly 3-4 of them (time will tell) Whereas Casemiro let's say for Man U will be a disaster even if he stays until the end of his career and they get 6-8 years.

Man U will be up there as one of the worst. Probably cannot compare us to Chelsea, Man U/C Liverpool or Arsenal, I guess some good comparisons for us would be Villa, Newcastle, Everton, Spurs etc. It would be utterly humiliating looking at Brighton or Brentford.

 

[Gank]

Wow, that’s quite a list. I don’t know if it’s surprising or not. I wonder how it shapes up against other clubs?

[El Scorchio]

Yup- sadly not even Rio, although let;s be honest he would have gone for well over 25mill today.

BUT this is more a damning of our transfer activity in the last 10 years or so when prices have skyrocketed from the Rio times. We've bought plenty of players for over that amount. Two of our top five, we've lost a fortune on (Haller and Scamacca) We will not get anything back for Kilman. The other two we should at least turn a profit from (Kudus and Paqueta- although I doubt all that much particularly in Paqueta's case)

6-10 are Alvarez, Felipe Anderson, Zouma, Aguerd and Ward Prowse. No chance of making a bean on any of them still under contract and Anderson was a disaster. Just to add some spice, the next 5 are Vlasic, Summerville, Fornals, Fullkrug and Diop. All sold or will be sold for substantially less than we bought them for, barring Summerville, you would think.

What a fucking list of disaster that reads.All under the stewardship of our dear leader. Half of them wee only at the club a season or two. And if you're being honest, only Paqueta and Kudus have done anything like justify their transfer fees. Fornals was here for ages but was he worth 28 million in the end? Probably not. And sold at a loss as per. Average age of the top 15- 25.5 y/o just for reference

Fucking depressing. And you could write an essay on it.

[Mad Ferret]

Even then it was nowhere near £40m.

You're way off the mark.