West Ham Online

Posted: **08 Jan 2025, 11:28**

https://www.whufc.com/news/graham-potte ... head-coach

In the past he's favoured a 3-4-3 formation...hard to see how we can do that currently with only 3 senior CBs, one of whom is injured. He's also played wingers (Solly March as an example) in the wing back roles.

Typically when a 3-4-3 gets announced on a match day the manager is immediately described as being too negative, too cautious etc. I guess it depends on the composition of the 4.

He's given young players chances...hopefully that continues at West Ham.

Welcome Graham.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 15:33**

Talk us through the good job he did.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 15:26**

One of his boys did a good job in charge of the WHU liver lickers, so can see him being the one to take over.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 15:03**

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 14:59
Gank wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 14:31
Sir Alf" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 14:17 Simon Jordan has perfectly described Sullivan. We are stuck with him until he dies unfortunately. His sons will probably be just as insecure, cowardly, and to use Jordan’s well chosen word, “insidious”.

It’ll be worse, mate. For all his many faults, Sullivan is a cutthroat businessman who made a fortune in a murky underworld of sleaze and gangsters, people were getting murdered around him and he came out a millionaire.

Jack Sullivan has zero work experience besides playing games with fringe elements of WHUFC and has led a privileged life this far, protected from the real world.

Hes an idiot Peter Pan weirdo who will become a puppet to his advisors and could well run us into the ground whilst making us the butt of our rivals’ jokes.

If you think it’s bad now, strap yourself in because mark my words, it’s going to be a LOT worse when the parasite dies.

To be fair (hoping here) the kid might realise he's perhaps not a business minded bloke and leave it to experts- the only trouble is they will have to be benevolent experts i.e. not his dad's mates. He might not even want the responsibility and just want to sit in the box in a non executive role. Kretinsky and the Golds would run absolute rings around him anyway, most likely. The executive power might even be put in Brady's hands.

If he wants to 'run' the club, we just have to hope he doesn't put his trust/faith in the hands of self interested snakes and leeches like his old man's mates. To be fair what I've seen he does seem to be a bit more sensitive and soft than his old man so might not want all the pressure headaches and stick that his dad can just shake off with no sort of guilt or sense ownership. Not everyone is cut out to be so beligerent and thick skinned

They may even just want to cash out, even if the intention was to pass the club down to them.

Probably all wishful thinking.

With any luck when insidious dies you hope that the Sullivan name will be history at West Ham.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 14:59**

Gank wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 14:31
Sir Alf" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 14:17 Simon Jordan has perfectly described Sullivan. We are stuck with him until he dies unfortunately. His sons will probably be just as insecure, cowardly, and to use Jordan’s well chosen word, “insidious”.

It’ll be worse, mate. For all his many faults, Sullivan is a cutthroat businessman who made a fortune in a murky underworld of sleaze and gangsters, people were getting murdered around him and he came out a millionaire.

Jack Sullivan has zero work experience besides playing games with fringe elements of WHUFC and has led a privileged life this far, protected from the real world.

Hes an idiot Peter Pan weirdo who will become a puppet to his advisors and could well run us into the ground whilst making us the butt of our rivals’ jokes.

If you think it’s bad now, strap yourself in because mark my words, it’s going to be a LOT worse when the parasite dies.

To be fair (hoping here) the kid might realise he's perhaps not a business minded bloke and leave it to experts- the only trouble is they will have to be benevolent experts i.e. not his dad's mates. He might not even want the responsibility and just want to sit in the box in a non executive role. Kretinsky and the Golds would run absolute rings around him anyway, most likely. The executive power might even be put in Brady's hands.

If he wants to 'run' the club, we just have to hope he doesn't put his trust/faith in the hands of self interested snakes and leeches like his old man's mates. To be fair what I've seen he does seem to be a bit more sensitive and soft than his old man so might not want all the pressure headaches and stick that his dad can just shake off with no sort of guilt or sense ownership. Not everyone is cut out to be so beligerent and thick skinned

They may even just want to cash out, even if the intention was to pass the club down to them.

Probably all wishful thinking.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 14:55**

I think Kretinsky's only in it to make a (relatively) quick buck from us.

He'll have his hands full with Royal Mail.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 14:52**

Gank wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 14:31
Sir Alf" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 14:17 Simon Jordan has perfectly described Sullivan. We are stuck with him until he dies unfortunately. His sons will probably be just as insecure, cowardly, and to use Jordan’s well chosen word, “insidious”.

It’ll be worse, mate. For all his many faults, Sullivan is a cutthroat businessman who made a fortune in a murky underworld of sleaze and gangsters, people were getting murdered around him and he came out a millionaire.

Jack Sullivan has zero work experience besides playing games with fringe elements of WHUFC and has led a privileged life this far, protected from the real world.

Hes an idiot Peter Pan weirdo who will become a puppet to his advisors and could well run us into the ground whilst making us the butt of our rivals’ jokes.

If you think it’s bad now, strap yourself in because mark my words, it’s going to be a LOT worse when the parasite dies.

We hope not. Is it a case of Kretinsky taking full ownership when insidious dies? Not that we know alot about Kretinksy but surely he can't be as bad or worse than insidious?

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 14:31**

Sir Alf" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 14:17 Simon Jordan has perfectly described Sullivan. We are stuck with him until he dies unfortunately. His sons will probably be just as insecure, cowardly, and to use Jordan’s well chosen word, “insidious”.

It’ll be worse, mate. For all his many faults, Sullivan is a cutthroat businessman who made a fortune in a murky underworld of sleaze and gangsters, people were getting murdered around him and he came out a millionaire.

Jack Sullivan has zero work experience besides playing games with fringe elements of WHUFC and has led a privileged life this far, protected from the real world.

Hes an idiot Peter Pan weirdo who will become a puppet to his advisors and could well run us into the ground whilst making us the butt of our rivals’ jokes.

If you think it’s bad now, strap yourself in because mark my words, it’s going to be a LOT worse when the parasite dies.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 14:17**

Simon Jordan has perfectly described Sullivan. We are stuck with him until he dies unfortunately. His sons will probably be just as insecure, cowardly, and to use Jordan’s well chosen word, “insidious”.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 14:04**

Classic Sullivan moves that there is no doubt. But as for Villa being LIVID we've not just ponyied up more than £80M if we really want him is amusing in itself. He's so good right now he still struggles to start ahead of Watkins. £80M+ for a back up Striker indeed..

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 13:42**

They were talking about West Ham's bid for Duran on TS. Simon Jordan said that this was typical Sullivan. He said Sullivan did it a few times with him when SJ was at Palace. Comes in way under value and tries to unsettle the player. Said he knows that Sullivan thinks he has that kind of pull and players will jump to go and play for him. He said West Ham lowballed for Duran in the summer and now they have done it again and as SJ said "The reason he does it is for the noise it makes. In his silly little mind he thinks the football world are all in awe of his bids, and saying " Cor, look at West Ham", when in actuality it makes West Ham look a laughing stock."

He said West Ham fans aren't fooled and are even laughing at this themselves.

Make him 100% right.

He ended by calling Sullivan "an insidious little twerp".

Bang on again.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 12:52**

Takashi Miike" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 12:18 the problem is he doesn't give a shit, he openly sits there in full view of the cameras with his favourite agent/s, yet some deny there's a conflict of interest in our recruitment

Cunts trolling everyone.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 12:18**

the problem is he doesn't give a shit, he openly sits there in full view of the cameras with his favourite agent/s, yet some deny there's a conflict of interest in our recruitment

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 10:56**

Russ of the BML" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 10:42
Lee Trundle" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 10:40 To risk being called a Sullivan defender, I struggle to see much of the good TS apparently brings to the club. We still need a left back and a striker, which we have done for years. If he has any input into recruitment then he's failed as badly as Sullivan has and Lopetegui did.

He's great for SOCIAL MEDIA though.

The good I see is his ability to go and get the targets. His record is good. But, as I said, there is a question as to who is selecting those targets.

This is it- it feels really intentionally murky. No doubt so Sullivan can pull his usual tricks of taking credit for the good and throwing others under the bus for the bad.

But yeah Lop was entirely down to him from what we understand, and also going against the wishes of others at the club. That's a huge embarrassment. And of course that means 40m on Kilman and any other players Lop wanted or didn't want by association is down to him also. Maybe all this bile coming out from him about TS now is him reacting badly to his own very public failure. No doubt they'll have had some robust discussions over it and I can;t imagine he can stomach being told 'I told you so' about anything. He would be that petty. I remember the last days of Bilic when there was seemingly quite a lot of spite and bad feeling between manager and owner. Doubt he liked Bilic saying he thought 'dildo brothers' was funny.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 10:42**

Lee Trundle" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 10:40 To risk being called a Sullivan defender, I struggle to see much of the good TS apparently brings to the club. We still need a left back and a striker, which we have done for years. If he has any input into recruitment then he's failed as badly as Sullivan has and Lopetegui did.

He's great for SOCIAL MEDIA though.

The good I see is his ability to go and get the targets. His record is good. But, as I said, there is a question as to who is selecting those targets.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 10:40**

To risk being called a Sullivan defender, I struggle to see much of the good TS apparently brings to the club. We still need a left back and a striker, which we have done for years. If he has any input into recruitment then he's failed as badly as Sullivan has and Lopetegui did.

He's great for SOCIAL MEDIA though.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 10:30**

I think TS has been good for West Ham. We have been much better at getting targets in with him about. Okay, so some of the targets haven't been up to speed - But there is always the argument as to who it was that targeted that player - TS, Sulli, Moyes, Lope.... ?? Who knows? And that is down to Sullivan for creating such a vague and foggy structure at the club and not setting a clear criteria as to who does what.

Bottom line - If TS is given instructions to get a player or whether he has targeted said player - His record of getting them is pretty good.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 09:40**

This season has been a complete disaster for Sullivan. It would be nice for someone to interview him over it.

He's had to go back on pretty much every major decision he's had to make.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 09:38**

Sir Alf" wrote: ↑21 Jan 2025, 08:49 This was all predicted a few momths back by many on this site. Sullivan was always going to position things via the media to set up Steidten or anyone in the role.

What puzzles me is that there are so few in the media that do not see what Sullivan is up to and do not question his “leadership” and the mess he has created and overseen these last 15 years.

Its so obvious he is the barrier to any progression.

I suppose if I were a journalist, I’d publicly show favour to those who would best further my career with inside info I can use as an exclusive, even if it was a loathsome person.

That has to be the reason because, like you, I am puzzled that anyone would look at the disgusting little man with anything other than contempt.

Posted: **21 Jan 2025, 08:49**

This was all predicted a few momths back by many on this site. Sullivan was always going to position things via the media to set up Steidten or anyone in the role.

What puzzles me is that there are so few in the media that do not see what Sullivan is up to and do not question his “leadership” and the mess he has created and overseen these last 15 years.

Its so obvious he is the barrier to any progression.

Posted: **20 Jan 2025, 17:03**

Pshyco scored all 4" wrote: ↑20 Jan 2025, 16:56 Kretinsky employed steitden. Dwarf very reluctantly agreed to it .

And if so would be the reason Sullivan's made it his personal mission to throw the guy under the bus and make him the bad guy and try to get him out at every possible opportunity.

Posted: **20 Jan 2025, 16:56**

Kretinsky employed steitden. Dwarf very reluctantly agreed to it .

Posted: **20 Jan 2025, 16:54**

I just find it weird you think I'm defending Sullivan just because I don't rate Steidten. I don't know how you've got to that.

Sullivan employed him, so I'm blaming him for that. Is that better?

Posted: **20 Jan 2025, 16:49**

"Just because I don't think TIM is the messiah (in any way), doesn't mean I'm defending Sullivan. When Tim goes, I'd want someone better in to replace him"

paste up me calling him the messiah (in any way)? I'll wait a long fucking time because you won't ever find it. on what planet do you think it helpful or constructive that the chairman is allegedly instructing numerous sources to praise 'his signing', while allegedly shitting on the rest, and allegedly blaming our fake director of recruitment for these failures. do you think that's a good way of running a football club? one that's just employed another new manager, who has to get the best out of these players who the midget owner allegedly thinks are bad signings, even though he signed off on every purchase

Posted: **20 Jan 2025, 16:43**

... and that's not me defending the previous managers, before you start with that.

Posted: **20 Jan 2025, 16:41**

Yes, there's ways of acting professionally.

Why do you think the 2 previous managers have banned TIM from the training ground?

West Ham Online

Graham Potter

Graham Potter

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)

Re: Graham Potter (announced)