West Ham Online

Big hammer from Norway here, haven't got someone to discuss this with so I am wondering:
What are peoples opinions on Mark Noble's silence?

But also happy to agree to disagree as you suggest, because we on WHO never ever agree on players anyway!

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 10:51

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 10:26

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:57

One might argue that a board member absolutely should be challenging the ownership and running of the club moreso than an employee? Certainly is in my world. 

As far as I can tell, Noble does the latter three roles you mention. He’s pretty hand tied on point one, especially when people are recruited for that specific role, with Sullivan also wanting to do the job. He’s definitely heavily involved in youth player recruitment. 

Brooking wasn’t employed by the club in a day to day job. He was little more than a an ambassador.

You can whatabout all you like, but Noble is partly responsible for the awful running of the football club. His tenure has coincided with some of the worst decision making in recent history.

The bottom line is that if it was some foreign chap doing the role he would get way more abuse.

As you stated, he was a NED. A NED has a duty to police the running of a company. I don’t personally hold him responsible, much as I don’t Noble. 

Anyway, people have their stool set out on Noble so it’s pointless debate. We can’t all have the same opinions so we can just agree to disagree! 

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 10:26

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:57

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:45

Brooking wasn’t a sporting director he was a non exec but was critical of the stadium move.

Noble has an active role in shaping the direction of the club. 

They do/did completely different roles at the club. Nobles apparent remit is:
player recruitment 
academy development 
player well being
club philosophy 

One might argue that a board member absolutely should be challenging the ownership and running of the club moreso than an employee? Certainly is in my world. 

As far as I can tell, Noble does the latter three roles you mention. He’s pretty hand tied on point one, especially when people are recruited for that specific role, with Sullivan also wanting to do the job. He’s definitely heavily involved in youth player recruitment. 

Brooking wasn’t employed by the club in a day to day job. He was little more than a an ambassador.

You can whatabout all you like, but Noble is partly responsible for the awful running of the football club. His tenure has coincided with some of the worst decision making in recent history.

The bottom line is that if it was some foreign chap doing the role he would get way more abuse.

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:57

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:45

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:44

What about the Sir Trevor question? Or does he get a pass because he was a better player?

I’m not criticising him for the record, same as I’m not Noble. But if you are going to take that view with one you surely have to be consistent with both?

Brooking wasn’t a sporting director he was a non exec but was critical of the stadium move.

Noble has an active role in shaping the direction of the club. 

They do/did completely different roles at the club. Nobles apparent remit is:
player recruitment 
academy development 
player well being
club philosophy 

One might argue that a board member absolutely should be challenging the ownership and running of the club moreso than an employee? Certainly is in my world. 

As far as I can tell, Noble does the latter three roles you mention. He’s pretty hand tied on point one, especially when people are recruited for that specific role, with Sullivan also wanting to do the job. He’s definitely heavily involved in youth player recruitment. 

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:45

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:44

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:39

There’s no evidence of him challenging anything, he’s only ever said positive stuff.
If (if) he is challenging then he’s clearly not getting anywhere so what’s the point of him?

What about the Sir Trevor question? Or does he get a pass because he was a better player?

I’m not criticising him for the record, same as I’m not Noble. But if you are going to take that view with one you surely have to be consistent with both?

Brooking wasn’t a sporting director he was a non exec but was critical of the stadium move.

Noble has an active role in shaping the direction of the club. 

They do/did completely different roles at the club. Nobles apparent remit is:
player recruitment 
academy development 
player well being
club philosophy 

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:44

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:39

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:20

 

Would you ask the same question of Sir Trevor Brooking when he was involved in the club under similarly poor top level management, out of interest, Goose?

How would you know what is and isn’t challenged behind closed doors?

There’s no evidence of him challenging anything, he’s only ever said positive stuff.
If (if) he is challenging then he’s clearly not getting anywhere so what’s the point of him?

What about the Sir Trevor question? Or does he get a pass because he was a better player?

I’m not criticising him for the record, same as I’m not Noble. But if you are going to take that view with one you surely have to be consistent with both?

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:39

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:20

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 07:48 He was an average PL player who is fairly unique for being a ‘one club man’.

The question though, is about his role now. From what I can see he does nothing. For someone who loves the club so much, he has let a lot of mismanagement go unchallenged. 

 

Would you ask the same question of Sir Trevor Brooking when he was involved in the club under similarly poor top level management, out of interest, Goose?

How would you know what is and isn’t challenged behind closed doors?

There’s no evidence of him challenging anything, he’s only ever said positive stuff.
If (if) he is challenging then he’s clearly not getting anywhere so what’s the point of him?

Ron Eff" wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:20

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 07:48 He was an average PL player who is fairly unique for being a ‘one club man’.

The question though, is about his role now. From what I can see he does nothing. For someone who loves the club so much, he has let a lot of mismanagement go unchallenged. 

 

Would you ask the same question of Sir Trevor Brooking when he was involved in the club under similarly poor top level management, out of interest, Goose?

How would you know what is and isn’t challenged behind closed doors?

Ron as you say Bellamy and Collins "got the club", you can add Alvin Martin as well.

Fauxstralian wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 09:19 There was no bid for Heung Min Son during his decade plus at Tottenham either
Maybe Noble used to shit in the communal bath & bring dog legs in for lunch as well

goose wrote: ↑13 Sep 2025, 07:48 He was an average PL player who is fairly unique for being a ‘one club man’.

The question though, is about his role now. From what I can see he does nothing. For someone who loves the club so much, he has let a lot of mismanagement go unchallenged. 

 

There was no bid for Heung Min Son during his decade plus at Tottenham either
Maybe Noble used to shit in the communal bath & bring dog legs in for lunch as well

He was an average PL player who is fairly unique for being a ‘one club man’.

The question though, is about his role now. From what I can see he does nothing. For someone who loves the club so much, he has let a lot of mismanagement go unchallenged. 

What I will never understand is West Ham supporters criticising a bloke who played so long for their club, who all his fellow pros talk about in the highest regard, including foreign lads for his ability to integrate them into the group; but not only that, despite what is being claimed, was a good player for the club. Good enough to be selected by 8 managers and be named captain by 3. 

But I mean, if AI says no other club would have signed him… 

As someone else said, has he been asked anything?
I don't get the criticism of him, he was a reliable player, our captain. And to be fair if a complete stranger ran at me on a football pitch, I'd punch first and ask questions later. The players had no idea what was going on.

I think he is quite smart and blocks out the noise with the owners. Just does his thing. Owners will come and go but Nobes will be there forever 

Thing I don't get is this question of silence. Was he asked a question?  If not what is he actually being silent about.


 

No formal transfer bid was publicly acknowledged or confirmed for Mark Noble during his career at West Ham United.Throughout his illustrious 18-year senior career with the Hammers, Mark Noble remained a steadfastly loyal figure, ultimately becoming known as "Mr. West Ham." While there was reported interest from other clubs, and Noble himself acknowledged hearing of discussions, there is no credible evidence to suggest that any club ever submitted a formal transfer bid for the midfielder.Noble, who made 550 appearances for his boyhood club, was the subject of speculation at various points in his career. He confirmed in interviews that he was aware of "a lot of interest" and specifically mentioned that Liverpool had discussed him in meetings. However, he was quick to add that this interest "never materialised" into a concrete offer.The narrative surrounding Noble has consistently focused on his unwavering commitment to West Ham, even during challenging periods for the club, such as their relegation to the Championship. There have been no official statements from West Ham United, or any other club, to indicate that a formal offer was ever tabled for his services. Similarly, interviews with former managers and club officials have celebrated his loyalty without mentioning any specific transfer bids that were received and rejected.Therefore, based on available information, it can be concluded that while Mark Noble's talent and leadership were appreciated by other clubs, this admiration did not translate into a formal attempt to lure him away from his beloved West Ham United.


That's what AI says.

I think I read something in his book about him having other offers and opting to stay put 
.
Why I bought his book enlightening as it is I  really don't know.

Swiss. wrote: ↑12 Sep 2025, 16:22

Mad Ferret" wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 17:19

Gank wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 12:21

Never mind being called up for England, no club ever EVER made an offer for him in his entire career. No lower division club ever wanted him on loan, no foreign club thought he could do a job in midfield, nobody ever wanted him. We should have paid him a pittance, he would have had to have signed it. It's easy to be a one-club man when only one club is interested in playing you for your entire life. That's not loyalty.

Not true.

Stoke put in an offer for him after we got relegated, but he wanted to stay and get us back up.

Wow the mighty Stoke. 

Mad Ferret" wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 17:19

Gank wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 12:21

Come On You Irons" wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 11:37 The loyal Hammer thing is ridiculous. He was only loyal because he was bang average and never got called up once for England in his entire career.

If he was at Rice's level he would have moved to a Champions League club like Rice did. He knew his limitations and knew he had it good at West Ham.

Let's get it right.

Never mind being called up for England, no club ever EVER made an offer for him in his entire career. No lower division club ever wanted him on loan, no foreign club thought he could do a job in midfield, nobody ever wanted him. We should have paid him a pittance, he would have had to have signed it. It's easy to be a one-club man when only one club is interested in playing you for your entire life. That's not loyalty.

Not true.

Stoke put in an offer for him after we got relegated, but he wanted to stay and get us back up.

Gank wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 12:21

Come On You Irons" wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 11:37 The loyal Hammer thing is ridiculous. He was only loyal because he was bang average and never got called up once for England in his entire career.

If he was at Rice's level he would have moved to a Champions League club like Rice did. He knew his limitations and knew he had it good at West Ham.

Let's get it right.

Never mind being called up for England, no club ever EVER made an offer for him in his entire career. No lower division club ever wanted him on loan, no foreign club thought he could do a job in midfield, nobody ever wanted him. We should have paid him a pittance, he would have had to have signed it. It's easy to be a one-club man when only one club is interested in playing you for your entire life. That's not loyalty.

jack rodwell
ryan mason
jake livermore
jonjo shelvey

all got england caps ahead of Noble.

didnt jimmy bullard get one as well??

Gank wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 12:21

Come On You Irons" wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 11:37 The loyal Hammer thing is ridiculous. He was only loyal because he was bang average and never got called up once for England in his entire career.

If he was at Rice's level he would have moved to a Champions League club like Rice did. He knew his limitations and knew he had it good at West Ham.

Let's get it right.

Never mind being called up for England, no club ever EVER made an offer for him in his entire career. No lower division club ever wanted him on loan, no foreign club thought he could do a job in midfield, nobody ever wanted him. We should have paid him a pittance, he would have had to have signed it. It's easy to be a one-club man when only one club is interested in playing you for your entire life. That's not loyalty.

Swiss. wrote: ↑11 Sep 2025, 11:28

XKhammer wrote: ↑10 Sep 2025, 23:02 Top fella Mark and very loyal Hamner doesn't deserve some of the abuse from the usual suspects on here 

So you have met him personally? 

What happened to Fordstar? Enjoyed his battles with Noble loving OneMac on here.