Forum | Non-Football Related

This cannot be, West Ham United, perennial supporters of the catastrophically long term injury' league, might transfer their star 'cripple' over the border to Scotland, with Glasgow Rangers being his unlikely destination. However before fans start to dance in the streets, any deal relating to 'Jack's' departure would almost inevitably involve some form of financial cushion for the 'victims'.

Somewhat harsh you might say, but Jack 'Wheel Chair' Wilshere has spent two seasons pocketing TWICE the wages paid to club captain Mark Noble! The astonishing and outrageous wages that Wilshere's agent managed to prise out of the Hammers hierarchy beggar belief, however in the current financial climate they seem inappropriate. If Jack Wilshere doesn't head North, and there is more than a possibility that he would elect to stay in London., then surely the club must come to some arrangement with him to curtail his serviced, and his huge salary.

The source of one of the most bizarre or exciting rumours of the transfer window, is that it has been claimed that Jack Wilshere played for a Glasgow Rangers XI as a trialist on Wednesday against Plymouth Argyle. Rangers won the match 3-2 with a late winner, but it is the rumour that Wilshere played for the Glasgow side on the day that appears to be attracting plenty of attention from supporters. The midfielder is in Scotland at the moment as he trains with the Irons, so how he was able to play for Rangers against Plymouth last night and be training with West Ham today is up for debate, unless Rangers had a private plane available for the return and were able to give Jack a lift, alternatively he could have just paid for a private jet for himself and the Rangers team out of his own pocket!

Unfortunately, like the player himself, this one has no legs! - Ed

Brighton's out of favour defender Shane Duffy has 'suddenly' become a target for David Moyes, apparently duffy is a player who has been 'coveted' by the Hammers manager for some time. Hmmm something fishy about this one, at 28 years old he hardly fits the 'young and energetic' profile of player that Moyes has outlined he wants to acquire, and his recent performances for the Seagulls did little to quicken the heart rate, his potential arrival at the London Stadium has been greeted with horror by many fans, so is he really that bad, is he any good and is he in demand?

West Ham are not the only club linked with the 28-year-old, Celtic who the Irishman grew up supporting have also expressed an interest in the Central defender so a move to Parkhead this summer may well appeal to Duffy more than moving to East London. Like the Irons Celtic are strapped for cash, despite the payments they receive from European competitions, those funds are used to offset the lack of 'proper' TV money from the major sports media, however they may try use Australian playmaker Tom Rogic who interests Brighton in a swap bid.

Before the suggestion of any swap deal Celtic were told to pay £2 Million to take Duffy on loan, this initially put West Ham in the driving seat but there has not been a frenzied rush to get a deal over the line, particularly from West Ham which leads us back to the 'fishy' element. Is Duffy even worth pursuing? The purported £5 Million price tag is par to the course for a post Covid valuation previously he was valued at £ 8.5 Million, not a bargain but not a fund bleeder either, however his wages are quite high at Brighton, he is one of their highest earners, on £45,000 per week. The plus side is that his injury record is excellent, with only one major career injury which was a Metatarsal Fracture sustained in March 2017 which kept him out for 42 days and 8 games. He did however sustain a 'freak' injury early on in his career, in May 2010 Duffy got seriously injured after colliding with a goalkeeper during a training match, he underwent emergency surgery after lacerating his liver and losing over 3 litres of blood, but his recovery was rapid and complete.

Duffy has three years left on his Brighton contract, but having fallen out with manager Graham Potter since his arrival there is a mutual desire for the player to leave, he only played a third of Brighton's games last season and his wages are unsustainable for Brighton to keep him as a bench warmer, which does rather beg the question 'how would he 'fit in' at West Ham'? Or more pertinently why is there a need for him in the first place? We asked a cross section of 'younger' Hammers fans through Ed Jnr's social media site and the response was entirely in the negative, with the over riding comments being " Have we just started to get rid of all the old crap just to replace it with another load of shit?"

The sentiment might have been put more eloquently, but in essence there is more than a fair degree of truth behind it, decent player that he is, Shane Duffy is a 'journeyman' defender, and with no disrespect meant he did end up at Brighton for a reason. In our opinion Duffy is no better than Fabian Balbuena, so unless there has been a serious offer put in for Balbuena that is not in the public domain, there seems absolutely no reason to use up a large chunk of the small transfer budget available on this 'mooted' transfer.

Finally, much has been made of the fact that David Moyes worked with Duffy as a youth player coming through the ranks at Everton, that is as may be, however during the entire time Moyes was manager Duffy only ended up playing 8 first team games, the rest of the time he was continuously loaned out before eventually moving to Blackburn in 2014 for £500,000.

Perhaps in better times Shane Duffy would have been a useful addition to the squad as a back up, but given the Covid-19 impact on finances and the fact that the 'Pellegrinophile' nicked all the money from the transfer kitty, such a move cannot be justified. - Ed

Contrary to all the 'leaked' reports, West Ham United have finally managed to avoid playing one of the top six sides in their opening fixture of the Barclays Premier League. The Irons begin the 2020/1 season with a 'home' fixture against Newcastle, a team that should have had a 'big spending' prefix, however just like West Ham they are broke. The Toons troubles are due to the failed take over of the club by a middle eastern consortium, the Irons troubles are down to a certain Chilean! Unfortunately the celebrations will have to be slightly tempered by the fact that despite avoiding a top six side for the first game, the next six fixtures are ALL against top six teams!

Although all dates are subject to alteration we have listed the fixtures as they have been released, Cup competitions and more importantly TV scheduling will alter the actual days and times of certain matches, with the Irons as usual receiving a disproportianate an mount of televised games given their early opponents and the club's proximity to the headquarters of BT sports.

The full list is as follows:
September 12: Newcastle United (h) 19: Arsenal (a) 26: Wolves (h) October 3: Leicester City (a) 17: Tottenham Hotspur (a) 24: Manchester City (h) 31: Liverpool (a) November 7: Fulham (h) 21: Sheffield United (a) 28: Aston Villa (h) December 5: Manchester United (h) 12: Leeds United (a) 15: Crystal Palace (h) 19: Chelsea (a) 26: Brighton (h) 28: Southampton (a) January 2: Everton (a) 12: West Bromwich Albion (h) 16: Burnley (h) 27: Crystal Palace (a) 30: Liverpool (h) February 2: Aston Villa (a) 6: Fulham (a) 13: Sheffield United (h) 20: Tottenham Hotspur (h) 27: Manchester City (a) March 6: Leeds United (h) 13: Manchester United (a) 20: Arsenal (h) April 3: Wolves (a) 10: Leicester City (h) 17: Newcastle United (a) 24: Chelsea (h) May 1: Burnley (a) 8: Everton (h) 11: Brighton (a) 15: West Bromwich Albion (a) 23: Southampton (h)

In a meeting held last week between David Moyes, David Sullivan, David Gold and the other part of the 'unholy trinity', West Ham United's precarious finances and future transfer policy were discussed at great length and plans were made in order to try and offset the appalling fiscal downturn that has resulted due to the tragic Covid-19 pandemic.

The obvious issue was how to reshape a completely imbalanced squad without even a fraction of the money that was heaped upon Moyes' predecessor, Manuel Pellegrini, who is now doing his best to empty the coffers of Real Betis in Spain! The first 'luxury' player to have their head firmly put on the block was Felipe Anderson, the talented but lightweight Brazilian made the cardinal error of assuming David Moyes had only been brought in as a temporary 'fire fighter' and would then be replaced by a 'top' manager for the coming season.

Much to Anderson's chagrin, Moyes excelled after the beginning of the Barclays Premier League project restart and clearly showed that he 'didn't fancy' Anderson, and we are not referring to how attractive Anderson is in his shorts to the ladies! Felipe Anderson has more often than not flattered to deceive, and his stand out performances are more than offset by his many lack lustre performances in the Claret and Blue.

Put simply Anderson is a luxury Hammers cannot afford, particularly given the club's current financial plight. It seems the rigours of the World's most exciting and frenetic league have proved to be too much for him, with the final straw being when he was 'roughed up' during the game against Sheffield United, to be fair the Blades did get away with one that day, however the result was that Anderson was never the same after returning from the back injury he sustained, he just didn't look like his heart was in it anymore.

Unfortunately Hammers' other south American play maker's form has also fallen off the cliff, Manuel Lanzini has DEFINITELY never been the same since sustaining a severe cruciate injury while training with his beloved Argentina team and great Pal Lionel Messi. David Moyes gave 'The little Jewel' plenty of game time, but Lanzini is a shadow of his former self who has lost all confidence, and more worryingly seems to have forgotten how to play the way he used to.

If the club can sell Anderson and Lanzini it could generate much needed funds to begin the shoring up of what was nearly the leakiest defence in the entire 'top' flight last season. The benefit of selling Lanzini is that there are no outstanding finances due for the player and therefore all funds received can go in to the kitty, whereas Anderson cannot be sold back to Lazio for any real fiscal benefit due to the remaining tranches of payments owed by the Irons to Lazio,regretably they seem to be one of the only clubs interested in doing a deal for him. Even if Anderson and Lanzini are sold for a relatively low fee, their wages saved will be significant.

The 'butt' end of the meeting between the three Dave's and the other person was a decision to move on misfiring strikers Albian Ajeti and Jordan Hugill, Ajeti has gone to Celtic and it looks as if Hugill will be joining Norwich City. Both purchases were loss makers, with the club losing potentially £8 Million excluding wages...another fine mess.

Moyes will be keen to see a line drawn under the 'Hugill' experience, as he was the one who oversaw the transfer, a disaster which he has now mitigated with the brilliant acquisitions of Jarrod Bowen and Tomas Soucek. Now they are the type of players the club needs to progress and finally get rid of the old people's home image of the club! - Ed