How much was he paid by the board to take the rap entirely ?Nesticles wrote:https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/44725744" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Tony Henry: West Ham's ex-head of recruitment banned for 12 months
What about the Director of Football who openly states his role in signing players who oversaw this whole recruitment strategy?
Late David Gold, Sullivan and Brady
Moderators: Gnome, last.caress, Wilko1304, Rio, bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
- Up the Junction
- Thinks he owns the place
- Posts: 71108
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
- Has liked: 765 likes
- Total likes: 3503 likes
Re: The owners - the case against (please keep live)
It was the ICF's demo - the still disenchanted protested inside the stadium instead and in turn generated far more publicity than could have ever have been possible with a march outside the stadium.The Old Man of Storr wrote:We had a brilliant plan but Sullivan got the ICF on board and they in turn managed to cancel the march and threatened anyone who still wanted to .
In terms of avoiding negative publicity, cancelling the march was the worst thing they could have done. And so here we are.
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
Most of the things that has been said about Daves are true. They are slimey, dishonest bastards.
That being said, be careful what you wish for if you want them to sell the club.
That being said, be careful what you wish for if you want them to sell the club.
-
- Posts: 15966
- Joined: Sat Aug 14, 2010 9:01 pm
- Has liked: 24 likes
- Total likes: 745 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
if they continue to back the manager this season and from then onwards and improve things at the bowl then that is fine. however no one trusts or believes the BS they spout.
- Ozza
- Posts: 28288
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:41 pm
- Location: Here, there, every f****** where
- Has liked: 943 likes
- Total likes: 2392 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
Why’s that? I can’t think of anyone worse than these leeching c****Thekorean wrote: That being said, be careful what you wish for if you want them to sell the club.
- westham,eggyandchips
- Posts: 25276
- Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2007 8:06 pm
- Location: On the tour bus
- Has liked: 2017 likes
- Total likes: 1496 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
Its a real shame it took a pitch invasion and some disorder inside that ****hole of a stadium to finally invest some serious dosh in the playing squad.
- Ozza
- Posts: 28288
- Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:41 pm
- Location: Here, there, every f****** where
- Has liked: 943 likes
- Total likes: 2392 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
Certainly not doing it for the good of the fans, I’ve said it before with these c**** they always give a new manager some decent cash in their first window, after that they massively under invest, I don’t see any difference now.westham,eggyandchips wrote:Its a real shame it took a pitch invasion and some disorder inside that ****hole of a stadium to finally invest some serious dosh in the playing squad.
- DaveWHU1964
- Posts: 14882
- Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 10:14 am
- Has liked: 1296 likes
- Total likes: 684 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
No, I won’t be careful what I wish for.Thekorean wrote:That being said, be careful what you wish for if you want them to sell the club.
I’d put the odds that we’d get worse than them at maybe one in fifty. I’ll take that. Under this lot I’ve lost much of my interest and care for something that’s meant so much to me for decades. I can’t get any of that back whilst the scum are still here.
GSB out.
- The Old Man of Storr
- Posts: 33001
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:17 am
- Location: Lost In the Recesses Of My Mind .
- Has liked: 2691 likes
- Total likes: 1787 likes
Re: The owners - the case against (please keep live)
Without opening the old arguments about who did what and why - yes it was an ICF led march initially but thousands of non-ICF joined up in the hope of having an influence on removing the Board - also , unlike the WHUISA it wasn't democratic , I'd like to say it was a benevolent Dictatorship but it certainly wasn't that even - had the march gone ahead with the proposed hearses it's possible that it would have eclipsed what went on inside the ground against Burnley .Up the Junction wrote: It was the ICF's demo - the still disenchanted protested inside the stadium instead and in turn generated far more publicity than could have ever have been possible with a march outside the stadium.
In terms of avoiding negative publicity, cancelling the march was the worst thing they could have done. And so here we are.
Anyway , we are where we are , Gold and Sullivan have finally found the keys to the safe but they're still here and they will be until they've amassed their biggest fortune of all . If they manage to buy the London Stadium before they go , carry on the current investment and sell to a reputable owner then most of us will be happy .
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
I would be waiting until the end of the window before coming to the conclusion that they are spending money.
Two of the signings, Fredericks and Wilshere, were free transfers and one was a relatively cheap GK from a relegated team. Maybe we will sign Anderson for a record fee but no doubt that will be offset by the sale of others - Burke already and rumours of Antonio, Obiang, Kouyate and maybe Ogbonna to follow.
Is this next level or a reshuffle of the pack at very little (if any) cost?
Two of the signings, Fredericks and Wilshere, were free transfers and one was a relatively cheap GK from a relegated team. Maybe we will sign Anderson for a record fee but no doubt that will be offset by the sale of others - Burke already and rumours of Antonio, Obiang, Kouyate and maybe Ogbonna to follow.
Is this next level or a reshuffle of the pack at very little (if any) cost?
- The Old Man of Storr
- Posts: 33001
- Joined: Tue Jan 13, 2009 11:17 am
- Location: Lost In the Recesses Of My Mind .
- Has liked: 2691 likes
- Total likes: 1787 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
I'm not bothered about them breaking transfer records and parading ' Marquee Signings ' , it's improving the Squad every season they should be concentrating on , instead we've had a Chairman who's been trying to find the next big thing every year and wasting good money .Hammers28 wrote:I would be waiting until the end of the window before coming to the conclusion that they are spending money.
Two of the signings, Fredericks and Wilshere, were free transfers and one was a relatively cheap GK from a relegated team. Maybe we will sign Anderson for a record fee but no doubt that will be offset by the sale of others - Burke already and rumours of Antonio, Obiang, Kouyate and maybe Ogbonna to follow.
I don't mind low spending and I understand a club like ours has to go down the loan route - just don't panic buy the likes of Arbeloa and gamble on the likes of Paulista every season , it's better not to spend money at all rather than waste it - I've no complaints about this summer's transfer window , it's been spot on so far .
David Sullivan deserves a lot of credit this summer .
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
It doesn’t matter who they sign or how much they spend, the pair of them and Brady are scum and the quicker their out of this club the better.
- Up the Junction
- Thinks he owns the place
- Posts: 71108
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
- Has liked: 765 likes
- Total likes: 3503 likes
Re: The owners - the case against (please keep live)
How is that possible?The Old Man of Storr wrote:...had the march gone ahead with the proposed hearses it's possible that it would have eclipsed what went on inside the ground against Burnley .
Do you really think the PL and FA would have given a toss about a few hearses driving around Stratford!? Of course they wouldn't!
But fans kicking off INSIDE a stadium, with the pictures being broadcast around the world? Now that's a story.
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
Moxy wrote:It doesn’t matter who they sign or how much they spend, the pair of them and Brady are scum and the quicker their out of this club the better.
Is the correct answer. There is nothing they could do now to redeem themselves, even if we did a Leicester. Any achievement at West Ham will always be in spite of them not because of them.
- Mega Ron
- Posts: 12447
- Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 2:35 pm
- Location: -.-- --- ..- / -.-. ..- -. - ...
- Has liked: 168 likes
- Total likes: 171 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
I'm with you on this Dave.DaveWHU1964 wrote:No, I won’t be careful what I wish for. GSB out.
I understand the 'Better the Devil you know' sentiment. But our owner actually is the devil.
- Clacton-ammer
- Sultan of Swing
- Posts: 15767
- Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2006 8:28 am
- Has liked: 336 likes
- Total likes: 357 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
Best thing to happen to us last season was the flare up in the stadium. I stand by that.
- Mega Ron
- Posts: 12447
- Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 2:35 pm
- Location: -.-- --- ..- / -.-. ..- -. - ...
- Has liked: 168 likes
- Total likes: 171 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
It's the proudest I've been of our fans in a long time.Clacton-ammer wrote:Best thing to happen to us last season was the flare up in the stadium. I stand by that.
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
Really?Ozza wrote: Why’s that? I can’t think of anyone worse than these leeching *****
I can think of at least 5.
Oystons, Venkys, Mike Ashley, the bloke that owns Charlton Athletic, bloke that owns Hull City.
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
The twats that own Manure, The murdering, lying, cheating, thieving piece of **** that own Chelski. That is just in this country.Thekorean wrote:
Oystons, Venkys, Mike Ashley, the bloke that owns Charlton Athletic, bloke that owns Hull City.
We could go on and on.
- Up the Junction
- Thinks he owns the place
- Posts: 71108
- Joined: Wed Dec 04, 2002 12:03 am
- Has liked: 765 likes
- Total likes: 3503 likes
Re: Gold and Sullivan ???
Please do. I'm quite enjoying your list/s.artlin wrote:We could go on and on.