Read the article and the subsequent abuse here…

It’s hard to be totally clear on who did what under the previous regime, but most of what I felt was good about it was down to the employment of Nani. Not so much that I think he was a genius, but I think it was very clever of the club to get someone to (in theory) oversee the development of the football side of the equation. Facilities, staff, players, scouting, training etc. It just seems like damned good sense to me, particularly as we’ve been slack in so many of these areas in the past.

In the transfer market I think Nani, or the system he’s overseen, has been superb. Especially in the circumstances. Halving the wage bill, getting top dollar for our sales, finding good players on the cheap, and investing in youth. Great strategies, brilliantly carried out. Savio’s signing is the only bum note over two years – not bad at all.

Nani’s legacy may be best measured by the string of youth players he oversaw joining the club. If even one of them breaks into the Premiership first team it will be a job well done.

And in the future I hope the club retain that strategy of having an overall vision for the development of West Ham as a footballing force. Simply making sure the squad is well-stocked is not the answer – each move must be weighed up like a gambit in chess. I could see the logic of what Nani & Duxbury were doing, whereas with a signing like Benni McCarthy I see little logic at all. But I hope that Sullivan & Co can prove me wrong.

As for the Man Utd result, it’s nothing that we didn’t expect. The next game, at home against Bolton, is absolutely crucial. Win it and we’re really looking safe, lose it and we’re right back in the mire. The absolute definition of a six-pointer in terms of our season.

Welcome back to that old stranger, Mr Form. Two wins in a row, and the tails are up.

Also welcome back to Guillermo Franco, who has been close to our best player in most of his 15 appearances this season. Apart from pace he has it all – great in the air, brilliant on the floor, great passion for the game. He also showed a good ability to mix it with physical opponents here. If he was 23 and not 33 I’d be absolutely wetting myself, but I’m still hopeful that his skills can be more than the last gasp of an aged player. I think we can get a couple more seasons from him.

The match today is also a rubber-stamp for a settled selection and formation. We seem to have found a way to fit Diamanti into the team without looking too much of a mess, and the key to that is the return to fitness of Behrami, who simply gets through so much work that he can make it seem like we’re packing our midfield. Our Swiss dynamo is also helping to get the most out of Faubert, who is starting to look much more of a free spirit coming forward. I would never have believed a fairly standard 4-4-2, which looked so turgid at times under Curbishley and Pardew, could now look like our most creative line-up. It shows that the game is more about players and how they fit together than simplistic arguments over formations.

What I hope and pray now, is that we can keep the current sense of confidence regardless of the result against Manchester United. Although a win would obviously be wonderful, losing at Old Trafford will be no disaster. The players and the fans need to remember that.

Nice to see West Ham put one win on the board, equalling our best winning run of the season.

And this was one of the home games I was slightly dreading. Birmingham looked tidy and very composed, as befits a side flying high in the league. There were a few scares when Bowyer managed to shake his markers, and we looked understandably shaky every time a high ball was lobbed forward, but the clean sheet is totally justified on the night.

I thought Kovac was quite superb in the midfield general role, and Behrami and Cole also looked much closer to 100% in terms of both fitness and form. Not much to say about Mido and Ilan, who both looked barely capable of much more than filling space on the field, but perhaps the boost that the incomers gave was more psychological than actual. Certainly with Mido and Cole up front, if nothing else it kept defenders busy and made space for the likes of Faubert and Diamanti to actually pick out crosses with some hope of end-product in the box.

The selection was certainly an almost complete u-turn from Gianfranco Zola, settling for a rigid 4-4-2, and dropping Noble and Collison to the bench, reinstating Ilunga and Kovac, and going for real experience. Brave decisions which paid off.

Of course he would argue that he’s not often been in the position this season to be able make changes to the side, and he’d have a case. Apparently Birmingham’s team was changed for the first time in 13 matches – what Zola wouldn’t give for that sort of stability.

With that performance, the team have righted the wrongs of that quite pathetic display against Blackburn, and with Hull at home the next home game the prospects do look good for an easing of pressure. Looking at the other Prem fixtures coming up, Burnley have Aston Villa, Wolves have Chelsea and Sunderland have Man Utd. If Wigan and Bolton can draw their match there’s a real opportunity to put some space between us and the bottom over the next fortnight.

Suddenly we’re looking upwards. Amazing what one win can do – if only we could have got it in December rather than February!!!

Another disappointing result to add to the list this season. Though mitigated somewhat by Burnley’s good home form this season, it’s still a potential six-pointer squandered.

As usual, looking at the shot-count seems to support the argument that once again we’ve been competitive in an away game. 23 shots to Burnley’s 8. Even the highlights reel was dominated by near-misses from West Ham. It’s such a carbon copy of so many games this season.

That’s why feelings of despair are still mitigated by genuine hope that we can deliver on what we’re actually showing in matches. It’s been such a weird season – for all of our failings points-wise, I’ve only seen one performance that I was truly disappointed with, and that was last week’s goalless draw against Blackburn.

But it’s getting to the stage where the hope of improvement, and the excuse of reasonable performances no longer cuts it. Of the 8 remaining home games we realistically need to win 5. Recovery cannot start after the next match, it needs to start right now.

It’s always been my opinion that we were ‘unlikely’ to be relegated. I felt that at the start of the season, at Christmas, and even up to the last week. I still think it’s more likely that we will survive, but the odds are mounting after every disappointing result.

Looking around the fan forums, I can see the belief starting to wane, even among the stalwart Zola supporters. I think we’re pretty close as a club and as a support to being in relegation panic mode. I think on the whole we’ve been commendably calm about the situation this season, given the mitigating circumstances, and the on-paper level of ability in our squad. But the mood is definitely on the turn.

I would say that if we want to comfortably avoid an acute relegation scrap we must beat Birmingham this Wednesday. Any less than 3 points and the mounting pressure will turn into real panic. And maybe rightly so.

Sullivan and Gold promised no sales, and they have been true to their word. But I think they were slightly foolish to make that promise – what if an absolutely fantastic offer had come in? I’m tired of idle promises – I just want good sensible decisions to be made.

Matthew Upson continues to be an issue. Considering our league position there is no way that he could have been sold in January, but by keeping him this season we have probably knocked £6-7m off his sale price. Factor in his wages and that has been a £10m decision. It’s easy with hindsight I know, but I think we might have been better selling him last Summer. Sullivan has now said that Upson will be sold this Summer instead, and it adds to the squad rebuilding required over the season break. It’s a dark cloud hanging over the squad, and it should have been dealt with sooner.

I don’t think we need 3 strikers to arrive, but I’m delighted with the sensible nature of 2 of them. Getting Mido in on a loan is an excellent decision – he has good experience of the league, is at a great age (26) and has something to prove. Likewise Ilan, essentially brought in on a free for 6 months, is a minor entry on the balance sheet but is another player essentially playing for his future, and the right side of 30.

I’m less happy with the more major signing of McCarthy – an expensive commitment to last over the next 3 years. We are committed to paying his wages at age 35. And my guess is that his wages are considerable – he is a veteran with a great goalscoring record after all. For him to be good value as a signing, I really feel he needs to be scoring goals for us for the duration of his contract. It’s a signing from the bad old days of Eggert Magnusson that Sullivan was criticising in the first place – let this be our last aging, declining player signed on a fat contract please.

At the same time, there’s no reason why McCarthy couldn’t go on a great run of form for West Ham. He’s here now, and he has a good reputation, and hopefully he can hit the ground running.

It seems to have been decided that other squad issues will wait. Many fans are complaining about lack of width in the side, but I don’t think that’s a major problem – it’s a style decision if anything. Others complain about the right-back slot, but I’m actually delighted that Faubert and Spector get another six months to make their case – I think both are actually good enough, but just need a bit of time and support to cement their places. We lack a senior goalkeeper in reserve, but as nobody knows what Kurusc actually offers as the reserve, it seems a bit unfair to criticise.

If anything, there are too many strikers now. But perhaps that will be no bad thing for a short time. Three of them (Franco, Mido, Ilan) are only contracted until the Summer, after all. We’ll see what Zola does with an embarrassment of riches in terms of squad options for a while.

Looking around the net, at the forums on WHO, and on some of the other blogs, there seems to be a reluctance to criticise the performance. Perhaps because of the Sullivan/Gold factor – are new owners allowed the same sort of Honeymoon period as new managers? I don’t think the owner should make a blind bit of difference to the performances on the pitch. It’s slightly weird, but perhaps a sign of the times – somehow we know so much about the inner workings of our club these days, that perhaps many fans simply aren’t willing to criticise under new ownership.

The story playing out in many fans’ minds is that Duxbury and Nani were bad, and we must be better now that they are gone – I hope this fairy story turns out to be the truth.

The weakness in the squad that worries me has nothing to do with formations, or lack of players, or of an unbalanced squad. It’s the lack of real belief or drive in the players that has concerned me this season. We are a side that can chug through a game at various levels of efficiency (Saturday being about the worst) but we are just not a side that can come out at the start of a match and take the game to the opposition. We eased Blackburn into the game for 45 minutes on Saturday, then were surprised that they got comfortable enough to start causing us problems. Nobody in our side grasped the mettle/nettle – nobody looked willing to take a risk.

I do support Zola, and I do think we’ll be safe this season, but there are problems here that need sorting out either on the training pitch or in the transfer market. Something is definitely not quite right – obvious statement I know .

Among many other things, Football is a sort of folk sociology, it is a very large-scale experiment in understanding subtle and counter-intuitive truths about cause and effect, talent and results, determinism and randomness.

I think he’s totally right. I think one of the major pleasures I get out of the game is seeing a group of people interact on the pitch, and seeing just how they do that effectively. And then researching how the levels and standards of preparation either do or do not determine the results that are gained. Speaking personally, it’s not so much that I crave success, but I am fascinated how that success is achieved.

But Lantz goes further (either into the subject or up his own rectum, you decide)…

It is also a sort of folk epistemology, challenging us to consider the limits of our ability to measure and understand the world as possibility space, to find patterns in data, to distinguish signal from noise, to predict the behavior of complex systems and make truthful claims about them.

I think this is actually the more crucial aspect of being a football supporter, and it certainly gets to the very heart of what I spend most of my time thinking about with regards to West Ham. Recognising the limits of our own (or West Ham’s) knowledge, and of understanding to what point we should be passionate and at what point rational, is I think the most crucial decision that we take as fans.

I often find that one of the things that is distinctive between fans, is the extent to which minds are made up and then changed. In fact I think it’s a crucial part of being a football supporter. For example I’m not in the slightest bit enamoured with the prospect of signing Benni McCarthy, but if he scores a hat-trick on his debut no doubt my opinion would change. But to what extent? Does it invalidate my previous misgivings? Probably not. It’s these contradictory signals that we have to deal with as fans.

I think one of the weaknesses that I continually detect in other fans is this lack of understanding of what Lantz refers to as ‘epistemology’. Because to have to consider the limits to what we know, and how certain we are of what we know, and the reliability of any given signal, is just so much of a mindfuck that it can really turn the simple act of supporting ones team into such a complex area of study that it becomes bewildering.

But Lantz treasures this aspect of appreciating sport, and I totally agree with him.

And the amazing thing is that Football is both of these things while being primarily a folk art. Those who crunch its numbers in order to analyze its nonholonomic constraints and unlock the secrets of its eigenvalues do so out of a sense of deep pleasure, compelled by an experience that is simultaneously scientific and aesthetic.

So next time you consider following the Hammers to be a waste of time, consider this high-brow approach. Inspirational stuff imo.

I’m not sure how I feel about owners deciding who to buy. I’m not so naive to think it doesn’t happen elsewhere in football, but it’s an idea that as little as five years ago used to be held in distaste in this country. I didn’t know how to judge Nani’s eye for a player either when he joined the club, but at least he was brought into the club on that basis by others – Sullivan has effectively hired himself as our chief scout, and director of football. I have serious misgivings.

Grab any set of football supporters around a table in a caff for five minutes and you’ll probably come up with exactly the same set of names that we seem to be strongly linked with. The days of Francos and Diamantis coming out of the blue seem to be over – get used to buying known quantities from other Prem clubs. This means we will be paying a premium both in fees and wages – the upside is that we will be getting players who presumably know what they’re doing in this league (one of the main criticisms of Nani’s signings).

Apparently agent Barry Silkman is at the heart of what Sullivan is doing in the transfer market. I only knew him because of his made-public comments wishing an agonising death from cancer on Bobby Robson after a dispute. Classy stuff. But a quick google search tells us that he was mentioned in the Stevens enquiry on corruption in football alongside Pina Zahavi. I don’t need to hear any more for the alarm bells to be ringing!

I’m happy that the club has been bought, and that there is some sense of security for the future. A takeover absolutely needed to happen, I don’t dispute that, because sooner or later the finances would have come to a head. Either in terms of relegation or administration or something similar.

It worries me that the only way these two can find to impress us is by mocking those who came before. It seems cheap. Yes, Magnusson was wild with his player contracts, but also was doing so on behalf of a billionaire owner at the time. Without his crazy contracts we might never have had Upson and Parker – presumably Sullivan and Gold won’t be selling those two to right Eggy’s wrongs? No, thought not. A bit more decency from our owners please, a few less cheap shots.

It remains to be seen where Sullivan and Gold really stand on the ‘crazy wages’ they are criticising. Today we are linked with Van Nistelrooy, Benni McCarthy, Benjani. I bet you that none of those are on less than £50k a week. Wouldn’t it be ironic for them to criticise Eggy’s contracts, and then hand one out a few days later. And if they hand out a long contract to any of these aging stars I suggest we grab our pitchforks and march on Upton Park.

The more I study Sullivan’s comments on the financials, the less I am happy with them. He wants us to be convinced that West Ham are in a desperate financial state, and few of us need convincing of that, but this figure of £110m debt is misleading – it makes no distinction between the long-term and the short-term, According to many reports half of Sullivan’s initial payment has already been transferred to financing debt, a fact which few media outlets seem to have cottoned on to. I think 95% of West Ham fans think that £105m is going to be disappearing into an Icelandic pocket before this debt is even tackled, but the reality is far more complex than that. I am pretty sure that if you dip into the balance sheet for any Premiership club, you can make it sound as good or as bad as suits you on any given day.

Sullivan is also very keen to mention money that had to be raised in January had he not come along as our saviour. But we just don’t know what would have happened. He wants us to think that one of our star players would be sold, but that isn’t necessarily the case. Presumably he intends to let Upson’s contract run down and allow him to leave on a free transfer instead – that’s a £12-15 million loss (plus a few million in wages) that he has just decided upon in a press conference, and before he even spoke a word to the manager. I’m not saying we should sell Upson, I just think the new owners are being dreadfully simplistic about the situation.

Then you have the sleights on the other bidders, which has already prompted clear responses from them in the media. Sullivan wants us to think he was the only viable bidder, which is clearly completely untrue. Both Cellini and Fernandes are absolutely clear that they had the money to buy the club, and Fernandes is particular seems by all accounts (except Sullivan’s) to have been extremely close to the purchase on Monday night.

Sullivan wants us to think that West Ham is a purchase made for non-commercial reasons. Absolute bollocks I’m afraid. And if it were true I suggest Sullivan would have been much better advised to buy a hospital wing or an orphanage, much greater for the public good and lacking any future debts. West Ham is a business that seems to have at least doubled in value since Gudmundsson bought it 4 years ago, despite the financial climate, in the richest league in the World, and West Ham are almost uniquely positioned to be the best bet outside the top echelons of the league to make progress. If you believe that Sullivan bought the club for any other reason than the fact it’s a highly lucrative prospect I’m afraid you are incredibly gullible.

I also consider the comments about the Olympic stadium to be total speculation to very cheaply boost his popularity. I’m sure we’d all love to rent the stadium after the Olympics, but this is hardly a new idea – what is he going to achieve that the previous owners haven’t? When questioned on the theory that the Olympic stadium is not built in a way that would support football he rather casually brushed off the issue. I wonder if a single phone call has been made to attempt to promote his theory that our chances of getting the Olympic stadium are “50/50”.

I take total exception to Sullivan’s comments about the playing staff – the idea of a 58-year-old property developer telling the manager (and the media) that we have too many midfielders and not enough strikers is both counter-productive and totally disingenuous. We can argue over whether Diamanti or Jimenez are midfielders or strikers (they are probably both), but revealing your hand in the transfer market before you’ve even spoken to the manager is idiotic at best. Presumably clubs and players will be driving a nice hard bargain as Sullivan attempts to prise away the striker he thinks we so desperately need to stave off relegation.

I’m also not sure of the logic of begging for further investment during your press conference after taking over a football club. Particularly after you have tried to make out that the club is in the worst state humanly possible. The pitch seems to be that they want other investors to throw money at them in an act of charity. Like a form of national service for any Hammers fan who has made money. I presume anyone with a few million and any sense was guffawing at their TV screens hearing this little gem.

Meanwhile, not a word in the entire press conference or accompanying interviews about the training facilities, arguably the most important issue for the long-term improvement of the club, and particularly the West Ham academy..A glaring omission.

And these are just my concerns about the press conference. Since then, the rumours suggest that they tried to shift Scott Duxbury, realised (shock horror) that it costs money to pay off a Premier League CEO, and have since reconsidered the decision. What a mess. No solid news yet on Nani, though the prevailing rumour is that he will be gone sooner or later.

I don’t think the club will be run this shambolically in practice. I’m happy to accept that these are shrewd businessmen with good experience, well-placed to help reduce our debts and provide stability. But I’m just not impressed by them. I’m not.