With the speculation about Zola being given the job over Billic I thought it might be worth while discussing what makes a great manager/coach. The leaks coming out of West Ham suggest that the reason he has been given the job is his desire to play attractive football. I am sure he did say that, but he would have to be pretty daft to say anything else. Didn’t the other men interviewed say the same thing? The important point is how Zola explained he was going to play attractive football with the current squad?

Before you appoint anyone to a job you look at their past record. Of those considered, only Billic has a record of success as a manager/coach. Zola has no real record in this role. It is impossible to make any serious judgements from a brief spell as joint coach of the Italy Under 21s. Peter Taylor and Stuart Pearce have both done well as coaches with the England Under 21s but have failed dismally as managers of club sides.

The real reason that Zola has been selected over Billic is that he speaks Italian and is willing to accept the management structure at the club. For Zola it is a no lose situation. If he fails, he will blame it on the management structure. If he succeeds he will get all the credit. What you won’t get is a tried and tested candidate accepting this deeply flawed management system.

I am not saying that Zola will not be a success. In fact, I expect him to do better than Alan Curbishley, but I doubt if he is the man who can get us into the top six. As a West Ham fan I hope desperately that I am wrong. However, if history is anything to go by, he does not have the potential to become a great manager.

Here is a list of the most successful managers in Football League history (in chronological order):

Herbert Chapman, Frank Buckley, Stan Cullis, Matt Busby, Bill Nicholson, Alf Ramsay, Bill Shankly, Joe Mercer/Malcolm Allison, Brian Clough/Peter Taylor, Bob Paisley, Alex Ferguson, Arsène Wenger and José Mourinho.

Just a few words about the managers on the list that you might not know too much about. Herbert Chapman was the first modern manager. Up until Chapman, clubs had secretary/managers. Their most important role was to make a profit for the club. Their main skill was in spotting young talent that could later be sold at a profit. They rarely did any coaching and players were expected to sort out their own tactics. The trainer’s job was to get them fit. There was little ball-work done during the week.

Chapman changed all this. He checked out the life-styles of players before they bought them. He did not like his players to drink or smoke. He needed to know that they had the type of character to improve under his tutelage. Chapman realized the importance of player confidence. When he bought a player he would tell them he was going to turn them into the best player in that position in the league. His strategy was to tell them that he thought they were the best. In fact, it was a kind of brainwashing (Malcolm Allison used a similar strategy with his players).

Chapman also introduced a new way of playing (the WM formation). He virtually redefined every position on the field. He won the First Division title with Huddersfield Town in 1923-24 and 1924-25 before joining Arsenal but his team went onto win the 1925-26 title without him. He also won three First Division titles at Arsenal (the last one achieved after he died before the end of the season).

Frank Buckley was the only other great manager between the wars. He used a similar strategy to Chapman. His main innovation was the importance of physical fitness. He believed that you needed to be superbly fit if you were to be able to stop the other side from playing (another strategy adopted by Malcolm Allison). Buckley never actually won anything when he was manager of Wolves (they finished 2nd twice in the First Division and were beaten FA Cup finalists). The reason for this is that Buckley was forced to sell the players once they reached their peak. In a five year period before the Second World War, Buckley made over £100,000 profit for his club in transfer deals. This was a tremendous sum in the 1930s and he was paid well for turning Wolves into a highly profitable club.

Stan Cullis was appointed captain of Wolves by Buckley at the tender age of 18. Buckley told him he was going to make him the best captain in the league and in time he would be the best manager. Cullis became manager of Wolves after suffering a serious head injury that stopped him from playing the game. Cullis adopted the same strategy as Buckley and as he was allowed to keep his best players. He won the league in 1953-54, 1957-58 and 1958-59.

If we look at the list above we can identify certain similarities. They were either very moderate players or in the case of Cullis and Clough were reasonable players but whose career was ended prematurely. Mercer was fairly good but he left the coaching to Allison. There is a reason for this. Naturally gifted players are nearly always bad coaches. They find it virtually impossible to understand how to coach someone to greatness. There is the story of how Glen Hoddle used to use training sessions to show how much better he was than his players. This is just an exaggerated form of the problem for the highly skilled player.

Except for Chapman, Clough and Ferguson, the successful managers have all been defenders. All three men were strikers and were not playmakers like Zola.

Nearly all the managers learnt their trade at small clubs whereas Zola only has experience of coaching the Italy Under-21 team.

Zola has all the traits of being an unsuccessful manager. The only chance of success is for Zola to appoint a high-quality coach to work with the players.

Great piece John. I would add George 'stroller' Graham as well. A man whose idol was Herbert Chapman.

It seems a done deal that Zola is our new manager at West Ham. How disappointingly poor an appointment is that? A foreign Glen Roeder, no more, much less.

As you have said previously, and I agree, it is a purely protectionist move by Nani (and perhaps others at the club). Zola had the least pedigree of any 'named' contender. A list with little or nothing to excite any West Ham fan. This club has a catastrophic ability, like no other, to appoint the wrong people - and disappoint the right people. I can't believe this is our new manager. I truly expected that after the England game a positive announcement would come from Bilic's camp (the only candidate I would've given consideration to on the list).

The fabric of West Ham many start to come apart now. I am not anti-foreigner, but we have no local input at the club and I wouldn't trust Duxbury to get me a loaf of bread. If we went foriegn I wanted someone bigger than the club - instead we got someone who could walk under a turnstile. Furthermore he will have no 'manager' role, despite what press spin West Ham put on it. If we just wanted a coach of the first team - playinging with Nani's acquisitions - then surely Kevin Keen could've done that...at least until a real tried and tested manager became available.

I'm sorry but I'm not playing 'wait and see'...I have no reason to believe this will be a success and I'll call it now.

I also posted this on KUMB and received a lot of flak for my troubles. West Ham fans have put on their blinkers now that Zola has been appointed as they are so keen for him to be a success. As T. S. Eliot once pointed out: “Human kind cannot bear much reality.” He also said: “Only by acceptance of the past, can you alter it.”

Some fans are even arguing that a “director of football” system can work. It is true that having a director of football and a manager works in other countries. In fact, it even works in England, see for example, the case of Stoke City. However, in these cases, the manager employed the director of football or they were employed together. The problem with the West Ham management structure is that Nani was employed by the board sometime after Curbishley took office. This was a scheme that was bound to fail as the manager must be allowed to make the important decisions concerning the team.

Nani is clearly the most important figure in the club yet what record has he got for deserving this role. He is also an Italian who will clearly be interested in working with fellow Italians. This goes completely against the culture of West Ham. Nani will do what has happened at “Spanish” Liverpool and talented young Italians will be drafted into the Academy. Eventually, Tony Carr will be removed and replaced by an Italian (in the same way that Steve Heighway was removed at Liverpool).

I suppose many supporters who want the same sort of success with clubs filled with foreign mercenaries. However, as a supporter for 50 years this approach horrifies me. I still see West Ham as a club that represents the community rather than a global brand.

I have no objection to West Ham employing a foreign manager, although I do wish he had some sort of track record that suggests he will be successful. However, I am totally opposed to the club being run by a director of football who cannot understand what it means to be a community club.

Even so, I am not convinced as much as you that Zola will be a failure. I think the board will get behind him in a way that they never did with Curbishley. In fact, the appointment of Nani was a way of forcing him out.

There is an interesting interview with Zola that took place a couple of months ago. He admits that he was offered employment by Roman Abramovich at Chelsea but he turned it down because he did not think he had enough experience to “be ready for a club he cared so much about”. He obviously does not feel the same way about West Ham.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/t...utd/7605386.stm

I think the situation would be dramatically changed if Zola appoints Steve Clarke as his coach. Clarke is someone who has a great record of success in the premiership. He has also worked with players of the highest quality and will get the respect of West Ham’s current squad. Something that Curbishley/Day failed to do.

John, again I agree with , and share in the whole, your comments above (last 2 posts). I have often thought you are too attached to the English manager notion for West Ham. However, I see you, like me, were open to a foreign manager (or indeed any manager) with pedigree.

The need, and it is a need, for a Clarke type figure is an indictment of the ability of Zola to manage the club.

I wonder if Donadoni's admission that he was not right for us - was a discreet way of saying he was refusing to work under/with the structures in place at the club.

Whilst, the KUMB writers are by and large knowledgeable and extremely caring fans of the club - it is noticeable that the site is used by a lot of less knowledgeable (though just as caring) younger fans. Perhaps, we're just getting too old and cynical and no longer have the youthful enthusiasm for the arbitrary selection of managers - I certainly feel a lot of the recent KUMB lead articles are not of the same high standard. Terry Brown could'nt have written, at least 2 recent articles, any better.

I would hope that the nightmare scenario of losing Carr doesn't happen. In many ways Tony Carr has been the most important man at the club for many years.

I will say that the community versus global issue needs to handled with caution and extreme care. I think both can be achieved through careful management. West Ham, unlike many clubs, has a special tradition and this is what makes a lot of fans...fans of the club in the first place. It is why we are so passionate and caring about the club. It is why people like us, care enough to trawl through the spin and write on forums like this. Ultimately it is why Zola should never have been appointed. Clarke would probably make a better manager when all is said and done.

However, what's done is done, the unduly swift and fixed election of our new leader has been held. Maybe politics and sport are not that dissimilar after all.

One upside the Italian in charge of the England team has seen fit to pick Ashton, Green and Upson. Perhaps Zola in his infinite wisdom will follow suit and keep an English nucleus - anything else could be potentially catastrophic for the club. Look at Liverpool without Gerrard and Carragher - it is hard to imagine supporting a club with such a variety of foreign non-entities in the East End. Unless of course we win the ECL.

Several fans have said that they cannot understand why Clarke would take the West Ham job. To a certain extent I agree with this as he will be switching from a number 2 at a top four club to a number 2 at a mid-table club. He probably feels that he has not received enough credit for the job he has done at Chelsea. If he takes the West Ham job and is successful, people will realize how good he really is.

Report in today's Times:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle4736185.ece

Steve Clarke resigned as Chelsea’s assistant first-team coach yesterday evening to pave the way for a move to West Ham United, where he will work in a similar capacity under Gianfranco Zola, the new manager. The former Scotland defender has agreed a three-year contract at Upton Park and his appointment will be announced in the next few days, once the club have agreed a severance package with Chelsea. The West London club are demanding £1.2 million in compensation because Clarke has two years left to run on his contract.

Clarke’s decision to sever ties with Chelsea that go back more than 20 years came as a shock to the club, with a series of meetings with Peter Kenyon, the chief executive, failing to bring a change of heart. Luiz Felipe Scolari, the Chelsea manager, also attempted to persuade Clarke to stay, arguing that the Scot owed him a debt of loyalty after he allowed him to stay on this summer and claiming that his departure so soon after the start of the season would reflect badly on the club. But after four years as No 2 at Stamford Bridge, Clarke’s mind was made up.

He has been seeking a way out since José Mourinho left the club a year ago, despite the award of a new three-year contract in the light of the Portuguese’s departure. Clarke did not enjoy a close relationship with Avram Grant, Mourinho’s successor, although he was given wide-ranging responsibilities to take training by the Israeli, which shored up his position.

It is understood that Clarke has been effectively sidelined since Scolari was appointed in the summer, with the Brazilian relying almost entirely on Darlan Schneider, his other assistant, whom he brought with him from Portugal. Whereas Clarke was close to Mourinho and all his assistants, it is understood that he has not been invited into Scolari’s inner sanctum. Although joining West Ham will be viewed as a backward step in some quarters, Clarke considers the opportunity to take charge of the coaching at a Barclays Premier League club as too good to refuse, as well as relishing the opportunity of linking up again with Zola, with whom he played for two years at Chelsea.

Clarke’s departure is a setback to Chelsea because he was very popular in the dressing-room, particularly with the English core of John Terry, Frank Lampard and Joe Cole. The club have no imminent plans to replace him.

After six games the arrival of Zola is not looking so good. I have watched the last two games on Sky and I have not been impressed. Zola seems to be one of those managers who fails to see what is wrong with the team. After every game he goes on about how proud of his team he is. In fact, the only changes he seems to make is when players are injured. For example, Collins only came in for Neill when he was unable to play. He still thinks that Faubert is a right-back and that Di Michele is not past his best. What makes him think that after failing for a couple of seasons in Italy that he is up to playing in the best league in the world? Di Michele's performances (one fan suggested that he is the laziest player ever to wear a West Ham shirt) has not stopped offering Diego Tristan a contract. The 32-year-old has not been able to perform at the top level for several years. The real problem is that players like this are going to keep our talented young players out of the first-team. The idea of playing Freddie Sears for five minutes at the end of games is daft (I know he got 20 minutes last night but he should have started instead of Di Michele). The other problem about playing Di Michele wide is that he provides no defensive cover for the full-backs. He also lacks the speed to be any good in breakaways. That is why Etherington should have played instead of Di Michele against Arsenal. Unless Zola learns this basic facts about the Premier League we will be involved in a relegation struggle by the end of the season.

OK, just when I though I was out, you've drawn me back in. I'll add a little update on my current feelings before discussing your astute, as usual, post. I can honestly say that I have never, ever been as disinterested in West Ham as I have been this season. It's not that I don't care, it's that I care so much it is upsetting me, and making me constantly negative to the extent that I have tried to distance myself from the club. I don't project myself through the support of my team in the way that some fans do.

West Ham are a shambles; a circus with no ringmaster; the clowns are running the show. We are a joke team and club at the minute. Relegation is a near certainty unless there are huge changes at the club...and we don't have the resources to make those changes. Zola is pathetically incompetent. We had a chance to choose a new manager (and I know I've said this all before) bigger than the club or at least one big enough to influence the positive direction of the whole organisation. Instead we have a smiling, yes man who is utterly inexperienced and clueless in coaching and management. It is not right that we are stepping stone for Zola. We are too big for that and for him.

In singling out Di Michele and Faubert you have named 2 of the worst players ever to don the claret and blue. They are woefully inept. In fact, yesterday in work I itemised each player, in terms of the level they can play at, for a guy in work (a Spurs fan) in order to demonstrate why I feel we are potential relegation candidates. ONe must also acknowledge that it wouldn't be possible to have a softer start to the season and 12 points is nowhere near enough. Again I've made the point in other posts here, when journalists and commentators spoke of our best start in years...an ignorant joke on the behalf of these dross merchants.

GREEN - Could play for any club in England. Perhaps lacks the commanding authority of a top, top keeper but certainly one of the best goalkeepers around

FAUBERT - This man could not make the starting 11 of another premiership club, in any position. He can't even kick a ball properly (he kicks like a girl). He would probably make it in the lower half of the Championship as a winger...maybe.

ILUNGA - Below average Premiership left back. His level would be in a struggling premiership side...though he wouldn't look out of place in a struglling Championship side

UPSON - I took note of your comments and find his lack of pace a definite downside. He is however an excellent defender and could play in the Premiership for a club in the 5-8 position

COLLINS - not fair to grade until he's fit. In saying that, he is an improvement on the man he replaced.

Our Captain - Woefully inept, could do a job for a Championship team chasing top 6.

NOBLE - Not as good as people think. But could play in the prem 8-14 no problem. Could maybe break into the top 8 in time.

PARKER - Probably our best player to date, and that's saying something. Same as Noble/

BEHRAMI - Allegedly a good player. West Ham fans could not vouch for this. Maybe it's the fact he is surrounded by incompetence that makes him so poor.

ETHERINGTON - There isn't much difference in his skill as a gambler and a footballer. Could probably make an impact in a Championship team chasing a top 6 finish. He is worse this year as well because Zola's 'attacking' set-up means Etherington has to do far less work. He does less work superbly well though.

ASHTON - Fit and on his day a top player. Could play in a team just outside top 4 no problem. Unfortunately those times of fitness are few and far between and likely to lessen.

COLE - A team looking to avoid Premiership relegation or gain promotion would probalby like him as a squad player.

BELLAMY - Is gaining in sharpness over the last 2 games. Still a top striker and could play in a UEFA positioned club with ease.

MULLINS - We always play well when he's in the team. I am obviously missing something as nearly every manager has tried to ease him out. Personally I like him better than Parker and Noble, purely because he does his job better than them.

Di MICHELE - A pathetic 'swoop'. I genuinely though we'd secured a player with a touch of guile and class (as we have no player at the club with any guile whatsoever). I really don't know where he could play, in fact, the lower the division the less effective he becomes I'd imagine. He already is woefully out of his depth. Sunday League team maybe.

DAVENPORT - A solid mid-table Championship player, no more no less. Could play in league 1 without looking out of place as well

Quick edit to add - After being rampant for much of the second half the clueless Zola waits until Boro equalise before finally bringing on Bowyer for Boa Morte. I confess I'm 'watching' the game via the Sporting Life text service but any idiot knew that Bowyer had to come on. Unbelievably he didn't come on earlier. (more unbelievably he didn't start) when the wing wizard Etherington was introduced instead, much to my chagrin. Wihtout seeing the game I can easily predict that Bowyer will have more influence than Etherington. I don't believe Etherington has ever really positively influenced a game. The best he has ever done is not look out of place in the starting eleven and rarely at that. Hopefully after what looked like a good first half performance we will get something from this game in spite of the (devoid of knowledge of his own squad) manager.

A draw will likely see us no more than 2-3 points clear of relegation by the end of the weekends play.

I took my grandson to see the Portsmouth v Wigan game and was unable to watch the game live. My brother, who did see the game via his computer, tells me that Zola and Clarke were arguing about substitutions. It seems that Zola was reluctant to bring on Bowyer once Julio Arca began to run the midfield. It seems that Zola is unwilling to listen to Clarke’s advice. If Zola does not change his attitude, we will be relegated. I see he is already the favourite to be the next manager in the Premier League to be sacked.

I was pleased to see he brought in Sears for Di Michele. I also approved the introduction of Collison who has impressed me in the two games playing for Wales under 21s against England. I would also have liked James Tompkins to have played instead of the recalled Lucas Neill. The selection of Boa Morte made no sense to me.

I was unaware of the arguments between Zola and Clarke, in fact, I think that's a bit of a scoop. Yes, even in the text service, it was obvious that Arca awas having an impact. I feel the press are going easy on Zola at the minute due to his popularity, generally amongst most footbal fans.

I like Sears, and there is a place for Sears and Bellamy in some games. I just don't know whether that combination allows a plan B i.e Hull it up front for the big man to knock on. (in saying that I have a theory that Hull and Stoke's success is down to the fact that PL teams haven't dealt with that style of football since Wimbledon. on paper United's 4-3 looked dodgy, but in reality it could have been 10.)

I am unsure about Collison, he was alright in the U21 games as you say. He just looks a little cumbersome to me. In truth though I don't know enough about him to comment. I do, however, like Tomkins. Could he do a job at right back? well he couldn't do any worse, and will get better is my answer. He's maybe just a tad inexperienced to play consistently at Centre Half.

Portsmouth v Wigan eh!!! One for the purists

A agree with most of these comments. I think you underestimate the potential of Noble and Cole and probably overestimate the abilities of Mullins.

The real disappointment has been the form of Valon Behrami and Julien Faubert. This is reflected by their overall ratings for the season so far. Also in the bottom four are Lucas Neill and Luis Boa Morte. This is no surprise as both did badly last season (as did Faubert). We have a bad record for buying established stars and past history suggests Zola should spend more time developing our home-grown youngsters. The up to date ratings can be found here:

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/2007WHsquad.htm

I watched the game live and West Ham were fairly impressive up to the time they scored their goal (as they were the previous week). Everton, who were playing for a goalless draw, had no option but to attack and it was not long before they collapsed. Once again Zola failed to act. Instead of bringing on Mullins for Sears he did nothing, allowing Everton to take control of the game.

The main problem was his starting line-up. He still continues to play Flaubert and Neill. The selection of Boa Morte over Etherington/Reid was daft and really upset the West Ham supporters. I expect he is playing these players as he hopes to get a fee for them in the transfer window. In fact, he is just lowering their value by playing them in the first-team.

Good post John. As can be noted, I was furious with the Everton result. Probably a bit harsh on Sears as well, who I have hopes for. We can't hold on to the points. Arsenal got 2 in the last 15 minutes, Boro scored in the last 10 and now Everton have mugged us with 3 in the last 8 minutes. A trend that indicates fear in the team.

Why Mullins wasn't introduced, or in fact, started baffled me. Again, and I'm glad many have noticed, Boa Morte is a really bad player for us. Etherington isn't much better; perhaps the youthful exuberance of Reid would be welcome on the left in future. I think he might give some energy to the role.

Neil and Faubert are a disgrace to the shirt. I'm sure they try their best, but someone has to tell them it's not good enough.

One final point, the team is missing a Captain. An onfield leader. Could a player really listen to Neil whilst, in the back of their mind, undoubtedly questioning his ability?? We really need a Captain and amazingly there doesn't seem to be one at the club!!! Noble/Upson? but both guys tend to be quiet.

I read somewhere that Zola is unhappy with Robert Green and is looking rid. No one can question the genius of Zola the footballer. Zola the manager, will hopefully be a short chapter when he writes his book.

The report by Neil Mcleman in today's Daily Mirror makes some good points:

http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/mat...15875-20883272/

West Ham last week invited their most famous fan Barack Obama to cross the pond and watch another game at Upton Park.

But closer to home, the club's own inexperienced new man in the top job is not bringing the change they need.

Indeed, after initial optimism following a brave appointment, Gianfranco Zola had more in common with a shell shocked Sarah Palin after this crushing defeat.

Only two months ago the likeable Italian breezed into the East End promising to put a smile back on the face of unhappy Hammers after the unpopular reign of Alan Curbishley.

But after the canny David Moyes exposed his lack of top-flight savvy with this act of twilight robbery, the 42-year-old left the Boleyn Ground with the look of a haunted man carrying the club's problems on his shoulders.

These include no wins in six games, a lengthening injury list, a defence which has now failed to keep a clean sheet in 24 consecutive Premier League games, continued uncertainty over the club's ownership, and the threat of a £30million fine.

It all makes sorting out two wars and a global economic meltdown in the White House seem like a piece of cake.

And Zola, who said he will analyse his own contribution to this latest defeat, knows the size of the task ahead of him.

"I am more than worried," he admitted after Everton scored three goals in four minutes late in the game.

"I am disappointed and sorry because I don't think my players deserved this. I take my responsibilities and maybe I have to improve .

"I'm going to be honest with myself and if I've done something wrong I will tell the players.

"Maybe I need to change something. May be Iam not doing enough. I'm going to be reacting, that's for sure."

But react is what Zola and his assistant Steve Clarke failed to do at the end of this crazy encounter.

The Hammers dominated the first half with flowing football and did everything but score. Freddie Sears came closest with a drive which Tim Howard touched on to the bar.

The home side deservedly took the lead after 63 minutes when sub Jack Collison rounded off a fine move for his first goal for the club.

But then Moyes, appointed by Preston in 1998, showed the difference between 10 years and 10 games in the job.

The Scot took off holding midfielder Jack Rodwell and threw on striker James Vaughan to grab the initiative - and the three points.

With the momentum shifting and his players, notably the returning Scott Parker, tiring, Zola and Clarke did not try to tighten up the game.

Instead Louis Saha was given time and space to cross for Joleon Lescott's equaliser after 83 minutes before the former Manchester United star added two of his own after more defensive slackness. West Ham simply fell apart.

"I noticed that Parker was tired, but he is a very important player for this team," Zola said.

"I was thinking of taking him off, but I didn't have any signals Everton were getting on top of us. Although those 10 minutes were very costly, it's very easy to look at those 10 minutes and forget about the rest of the game."

Yet the boos at the final whistle showed the Premier League is no place for work experience. Portsmouth at home this Saturday is not to be lost.

Martin Samuel in The Times:

Do not be fooled by the league table. On Saturday night the gap between ninth and nineteenth place was three points, so West Ham United, thirteenth after defeat at home by Everton, are in a relegation battle just the same as West Bromwich Albion. Indeed, West Ham’s situation could worsen rapidly, because this is a club who have made no provision for the bad times. Gianfranco Zola was an ambitious appointment as manager, with his talk of the Champions League and eye-candy football, but he is not a man for a scrap at the wrong end of the table. And how many potential relegation seasons will Steve Clarke, his assistant, have experienced at Chelsea?

In the circumstances, the last thing the players need is an excuse to underperform, but with the speculation over the future of the club under Bjorgolfur Gudmundsson, they have one. Scott Duxbury, the chief executive, attempted to calm fears last week, but he lost the right to be taken seriously long ago; more significant was the hasty resignation of Mike Lee as a non-executive director, ostensibly to streamline decision-making, but quite possibly to end any risk of responsibility or personal liability, with Gudmundsson’s finances faltering. Lee is responsible for West Ham’s media machine, so when Pollyanna can no longer put on a brave face, there really could be trouble ahead.

It is not unthinkable that West Ham and Sheffield United will pass each other, one up and one down, at the end of this season, with the relegated club also lighter by tens of millions as a result of the muddled judgment by Lord Griffiths. It would be a bitter irony; although one for which a chain of poor decision-makers at Upton Park are entirely responsible.

A sound article.

Hopefully there will be actions to accompany Zola's words. However, I don't trust him to make the right changes.

Which players do you think are Captaincy material at the club. I am beginning to think onfield leadership is a huge concern. A good question might me since Billy Bonds, who was the last good captain at the club? Any response mentioning Christian Dailly will be automatically binned and your knowledge queried

Furthermore, in your experience, is there something institutionally weak about West Ham as a club. There really has never been a questioning, strong manager or player at the club in all the time I have supported them. Redknapp took £300k from the club in return for not demanding all the Ferdinand to Leeds money. He then used his son as an agent to bring in Camara and Song from Liverpool and Dailly. When this all went awry he made demands for the rest of the Ferdinand money through the press. This sealed his departure from the club, with Lampard Sr.'s forced exit being used as an excuse by everyone, Lampard Jr, Redknapp and the board.

There has never been a chairman willing to go into debt (however small) to sustain the club. In fact the times this has happened, the next opportunity has resulted in major sales. I suspect that this stems from the ownerships need for West Ham to be profit making; a historical requirement from reading your articles and Lyall's book.

If Zola agrees to winter sales (which he has already said will happen: albeit caveated with the sales are to come from mainly squad players (if he can be believed)) and doesn't replace them with better players, we are done for. I'm not expecting us to be Man U, but I expect some form of strength.

JUST READ THE SAMUEL'S ARTICLE -

Now here speaks a man who I have a lot of journalistic respect for. He speaks very wisely. For a very long time I have mentioned the Iceland bank situation, well before it became newsworthy in terms of West Ham. I hadn't appreciated Mike Lee's position - I now, unfortunately do, and can appreciate the significance. Duxbury is a liar and a thief, provably so. He is also incompetent, but that was probably what he was told to, ostensibly, seem.

I think Samuel was being nice when he describes Zola's appointment as ambitious. On the Sunday supplement he was using much less supportive terms, whilst stating that he liked Zola the player.

My prescription - We shold be sold asap. Unless the Icelandic plan is to asset strip us to the Championship and bail out, bankrupt. He, as major shareholder, through his bank, called in the XL loan which hastened the demise of our sponsor. Though, probably, the correct move if you wanted to capitalise any assets at the firm, instead of dealing with notional money. Not a great plan for West Ham who have lost real money on the move.

I agree it is a problem. Neill's own performances make him an ineffective captain. I would go for Parker.

I thought West Ham produced a reasonable performance against Liverpool last night. I was amazed that Zola continues to play Faubert instead of Collinson. Not only is Faubert not up to the job, it means that Behrami has to play in his wrong position to accommodate him. His passing his appalling. He has this tendency to pass without looking. This is bad enough when he is going forward but on several occasions he passed the ball backwards without looking. He is constantly out of position and gave Neill no help last night. Luckily, Liverpool failed to take advantage of Neill and he was not exposed as he should have been.

Collins and Upson are developing a useful partnership and Parker, Mullins and Behrami provided them with plenty of cover. It seems that Clarke has now got them well-organized and three clean-sheets on the trot is reassuring.

Although West Ham did not attack a great deal, when they did, they looked fairly dangerous and twice Cole was through when he was wrongly ruled to be offside. It is a shame that the best chance fell to Boa Morte. I did not even get excited as I knew he would put it wide.

Yes, a reasonable performance is apt description. Absolutely agree with everything above. A good point at Anfield though. I think John Kennedy was president the last time we won there!!!

On Ilunga -
One of my friends (all Liverpool fans, including my wife) commented that Ilunga was having a nightmare - I corrected him quickly and explained that it was actually an improving performance.

On Faubert -
None of my friends (and Mal Donaghy (I can't help this name dropping)) could believe that Faubert was that bad - unfairly I had highlighted him before the game as a poor player - he was amusing for them to watch.

On Boa Morte -
Boa Morte another player I had highlighted before the game as potential entertainment for the home fans - and he never let me down with the hideously skewed shot. It would have been less embarrassing if he had a Gerardesque air shot. No-one could believe it wasn't a corner - every single Liverpool fan with me was convinced it was deflected out - I swear.

On the good/solid players -
I am, however, delighted that we are not conceding. Green, Upson, Collins, Parker, Mullins and Bellamy are all deserving of credit for their hard working displays in the recent run of three clean sheets. It is, for me, vitally important to build a decent defence and incorporate attacking flair secondarily. Perhaps a fit Ashton (if such a thing exists) would be able to hold up and link play.

On goal scoring -
As things stand currently it is difficult to see where the goals are going to come from. None of the midfield can be described as a goal scorer. None of our defence scores with any regularity from set-plays. I can't recall Bellamy's last goal off-hand and whilst Cole has provided the odd spark of goal scoring ability, it would frighten me to ever rely on him. If we do concede, I don't know how we get back into games, there is no creative or goal scoring threat currently fit at the club.

On the the rest of the season -
Still the steady improvement in defending, no doubt with origins in Clarke, gives me reason to hope we can avoid relegation.

More imminently will we avoid the January Sales.

Cole has not recaptured the form he was showing before being suspended but he does not deserve the criticism he has been receiving on the forums. However, he does need to improve, and I would be tempted to play Freddie Sears against Spurs. The problem is that Zola seems to be the kind of manager who does not change his team if they are getting draws. (I thought his use of substitutes against Liverpool very strange).

I was rather concerned by the post-match interview with Upson. Reading between the lines he seemed to be saying he was going in January.

In today's Daily Express Gianfranco Zola is reported to have said he was "dismayed by the physical condition of the West Ham players" when he took over in September. Zola claims that his different training regime is finally improving the situation. "The players are working well, the physios are doimg a good job and when you are fit and well-trained it is more difficult to get injured."

Zola went on to praise Steve Clarke: "He is such an important person for me and he is the best signing I will make. He is someone who I can rely on in the difficult moments. A lot of what is going on here is down to him. He is doing a fantastic job."

A much better performance against Chelsea. At last he has discvered that Faubert needed to be replaced by Jack Collison. Mark Noble also fully deserved his recall. Parker had a great game and I thought the diamond shape worked well. Except for nearly giving away a penalty I thought Neill had one of his best games for the club. In fact, Neill has done fairly well over the last few games and now only rarely goes upfield. This is good because he is s slow getting back. However, we need a couple of full-backs like Chelsea who give you attacking options. I would also like to see Freddie Sears replacing Cole for the last 25 minutes in games.

According to some of the Sunday papers Zola will resign if the board sell his best players. In an interview on Sky before yesterday's game he was adament that his stars will not be leaving.

Zola told the 'News of the World', "I have been told the club won't change but we will see. If they tell me they need to change their strategy I would have to think about my future because the scenario would have changed. When I agreed to come here as manager it was because of the project of developing the players we have got, bringing on the younger ones and keeping them to reach a point when we could compete with the big clubs. That was the project, but a lot of things have happened on and off the pitch. We need time but the club must speak to me if they need to change their strategy."

Without a doubt, an improved performance. Collison was immense - much better than Behrami, whom Nani rates so highly. I cannot tell you how impressed I was - mainly as I had little expectation. However the energy supplied by Noble and Collison was infectious. I have noted Neils steady improvements and agree that since he has curtailed his forward adventures he has improved.

Ilunga and Cole still look poor. Cole is awful and yet I imagine he won't have many better games than yesterday. He had two relatively easy chances to score - didn't make contact on the first from 6 yards and back passed the ball to Cech with what should have been the game clincher.

We still look poor in terms of creating chances and I'm not sure this will necessarily improve against 'lesser' opposition.

A valuable point.

I was heartened to hear Zola say he'll walk if first team players are sold. If the owner calls Zola's bluff on this - Zola walks, we lose our best players, we get relegated, no-one buys the club - we could be doomed. In the short term (until new ownership) it might be best for the status quo to remain - comments??

Interesting article by Richard Williams:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/20...helsea-west-ham

Should Zola have celebrated West Ham's goal on Sunday?

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/col...amp;attr=796995

I think he was in shock.

Good one. It shows that he does not understand West Ham fans (he has now made a statement on the club website that suggests he is now aware that he should not have made the post-match comments).

I am sure your manager would also be in shock if Keane scored at the moment.

You can't score from the subs bench
I wouldn't have a problem however with someone like Keane not celebrating if he scored against Tottenham - doesn't it just show a little respect for the former club?
Incidentally I think you should stick with your manager.

Nor would I. But it is different for a manager. The real problem was that after the game he praised the Chelsea fans but did not mention the West Ham travelling fans. This is especially a problem as some fans think he is using this job to get one at Chelsea.

I also think they should stick with Zola (especially while he retains Clarke to do the real job). However, was he appointed because he agreed to balance the books by selling our best players? If so, all the fans, including me, will be calling for his head if he does this in January.

I think that's a little over sensitive of them - the guy spent a long time at Chelsea

I acknowledged the lack of emotion from Zola at the time, not giving it much thought beyond that. I was, however, more irked by the fact he waited to warmly embrace Chelsea players coming off the pitch; whilst barely shaking hands with any of his own players. I thought this was quite extraordinary.

I watched the match on TV and saw him embrace and shake hands with both.
I am not a West Ham fan so my eyes may have been playing tricks with me.

Your eyes are fine Andy especially when you want them to be

It was a little hyperbole from me. But a non-knowledgeable fan would be hard pressed to identify which team Zola managed. I would also say in the little bits it did show of him at the end of the game he looked more inclined to the certain Chelsea players.

There is ample time before and after games to 'catch up' - anything much more and I believe it tends to be for the cameras.

Another impressive performance against Portsmouth. I was especially pleased by the way they responded to letting in an early goal. I believe it is true that previous to this game, they have not got a point after going behind. The remained positive going forward and it was no real surprise that they got four goals. As I said before, the main reason for this improvement in form is the inclusion of Noble and Collison. This enables West Ham to protect the back but still get men into the opponents penalty area. I urged Cole to be replaced by Sears against Portsmouth as I thought his movement alongside Bellamy would upset the two big centre-backs. Although Zola/Clarke did not do this, they did not send in a lot of high-balls from the back. Instead the balls out of defence went to Bellamy on the wings. This worked fine as West Ham kept on getting behind the backs. Collison was immense scoring one and making two, his long pass to Bellamy for the third was fantastic. Zola is now taking credit for giving him his chance but the fans wanted him playing earlier instead of Faubert. In the same way that the fans want Sears to start in front of Di Michele.

Neill gave away the penalty he has been threatening to do over the last few weeks. Luckily we got away with it. I was nervous about the decision to bring on Faubert at half-time. Soon after he came on he dashed forward and gave the ball away and Crouch nearly scored from the resulting centre. However, after that he settled down and made one brilliant covering tackle. He still makes the odd pass inside without looking. Hopefully, Clarke will remove this from his game. The rest of the defence had excellent games.

Bellamy is out today. Hopefully, he will play Sears instead. However, I expect he will play Tristen. This will be a mistake as Stoke are a big side who will be beaten on the floor rather than in the air. We are clearly a better counter-attacking away side at the moment and expect us to struggle to score today. Maybe it will be Noble to score the only goal with a free-kick (I don't think he has got one on target this season).

This was an amazing game for sure. A great result. Two very evenly matched teams gave everything, and though it could have been 4-1 to Portsmouth, I am delighted the pendulum swung our way. It was undoubtedly a very positive performance.

As for the Neill penalty, I viewed that as an aggregate decision, made on the back of 3-4 penalty claims made by Portsmouth in the preceeding 30 minutes. There was no way it was a penalty. Crouch should be ashamed at how easily he was 'pushed' off the ball. How much was Neill missed? Faubert was pathetic and Pompey murdered us on our right side the whole second half. You've correctly identified a couple of instances of his poor play. He was also outjumped by their small right back (Wilson) for a shot which hit a post. He continually hits poor passes and bombs on without seeing the result of his poor passing. Behrami, Collison, Parker and others had to continually tuck in to assist him. Faubert should never play for us again. He has threatened to leave (reckons we're hurting his chances of making the French team by not playing him). I know the French have been poor lately but not that bad surely. Good riddance.

MOM: Craig Bellamy. Best performance in a West Ham shirt .Star Men: Collison was huge for us. Green kept us in it as usual. Davenport and Upson building a good partnerhip. Ilunga and to vastly greater extents Faubert, Di Michele are poor on an alarmingly regular basis. Nice to see Cole get a 'Johnny on the spot' goal. Nice to see him get any goal - hope he can fire on.

Good call on Sears for Bellamy for both Portsmouth and today. I think you're, unfortunately, right that Tristan will play. Though he might start Di Michele as a nippy player who could shine against Stoke.

Just watched West Ham's lucky victory over Stoke online. They were very poor today and badly missed Bellamy and Noble. As Collins was at fault for the Stoke goal you could also argue they missed Davenport. Faubert probably had his worse game so far in a West Ham shirt. His reputation went before him and he was left completely unmarked throughout the game. He must have made 20 crosses, not one was on target.

Di Michele showed a couple of nice pieces of skill on the ball but is far too slow for the Premiership. His reaction time is terrible. I just cannot understand what Zola has against Sears. Cole got a good goal but the winner was very lucky. However, it pushed us up the table and today's results show that Spurs and Newcastle are back in trouble. There will be mass demonstrations by the fans if West Ham sells Bellamy to Spurs. Especialy if it gets them out of a mess and we get dragged back into a relegation fight.

I am out tonight so have set the sky plus to record the game on football first at 10:15. Will post back with more substance after watching. I did 'watch' it on skysports/sportinglife text service. It seemed that a lot of Stokes early work was on our right. We seemed OK for most of the game.

Yes, I think we'd miss Davenport and Neill at the moment. 1 month ago I would've sworn that was a sentence I'd never think never mind type . It looked, on paper, to be the weakest side we've put out all season. Boa Morte, Faubert, Di Michele all starting...scary.

. In all my time on the forum this is easily the most frightening thing I've ever read I can't believe that he could be any worse - I can't wait to see this.

I'm delighted that Cole has got a goal today. I could go on about how he probably should've had 2-3 but I'm trying to be more positive. If he can kick on and get some goals to go with his hard work, perhaps he can be an asset.

I can't see Bellamy going to S***s, the reasons you've stated are also the biggest reason for my belief he'll stay or perhaps go to City if Hughes isn't sacked. They are currently getting beat 1-0 by Blackburn.