I don't know if you can say the club cover most things up, when one of the regular criticisms of the owners is that they don't shut up and it causes people embarrassment.
So the criticism here is that they didn't say anything about Arbeloa but did say something about Payet?
and where is the evidence they covered up the length of Carroll's injuries? Honest question, as nothing I've read has said that other than like opinion pieces ok Claret & Hugh.
Where did I say it was a criticism? (First time round)
I'm just saying what they seem to normally do in these situations, they've covered up other stuff including Sakho meltdowns as well, but with Payet it's come to the front, im just curious as to why, did Slav have enough with the player the board all of them?
Carroll's injury was 4-6 weeks yet it took months and they didn't want to release that info because it was carroll again and a negative along with what was going on at the stadium at the time
Arbeloa was reported as having a knock before palace away (3 at the back) and never had an injury update mentioned until he suddenly returned in a game where we had no choice but to play him, he then got a proper injury (severe bruising?) The first knock wasn't real he'd fallen out with Slav.
Sorry I can't give you a quote and I'm not going down that road again
Sometimes it almost seems like you would rather nobody ask questions and just let you state your opinion as fact.
It's funny to me that you love to prod at people and wind up but the second some questions your high and all powerful word (not even aggressively, I should add) you kick off.
What you'll notice through all of the comments I've made about this whole saga, is that I believe he has family issues. My point has always been that ther are ways to deal with things. I don't see this as something you can beat the owners for.
But you go for it, pal.
;ok
(I can say what I like it I end it with a thumbs up, right?)
I have to agree on that, that fact that he only seems to have eyes for France does seem to confirm the family issue and TBH they are more important than WH.
I'm not questioning what your opinion is, I'm just telling you mine, that's it. If you choose not to believe it, honestly it's fine!! Where have i kicked off?!?!
You brought up the "criticism" of the club over certain situations, I just said what it appeared to me that they "normally" do or behave in certain negative situations.
I've given you examples of the way the club acted, if you don't think that is true that's okay
You know what I was going to walk away yesterday and probably should've done, well now I am, because if I'm having these words with someone like you then something is wrong somewhere, so I'll leave, it must be me.
Point is if Payet had other motives for leaving (non family related), he wouldn't be going to Marseille. It's that simple IMO.
I don't think it is that simple. I can think of at least 2 other reasons why he's (supposedly) going to Marseilles. And that's before I've had a ;coffee
Point is if Payet had other motives for leaving (non family related), he wouldn't be going to Marseille. It's that simple IMO.
I don't think it is that simple. I can think of at least 2 other reasons why he's (supposedly) going to Marseilles. And that's before I've had a ;coffee
with Payet it's come to the front, im just curious as to why
Here are 3 suggestions:
1. Pragmatism: Payet was 100% clear and determined he won't play for West Ham ever again, and Slav recognises that his efforts to change Payet's mind have failed. So there's no way it can be hidden and no point, as it will become clear soon enough.
2. Frankness: Slav knew that the 1st question in the presser would be about player availability, so just got on with telling them the situation before they asked.
3. Damage limitation: They decided to get it out there as soon as the situation became irreversible, to avoid all the rumour and gossip that would annoy the fans and make more negative waves about the club.
I'm not questioning what your opinion is, I'm just telling you mine, that's it. If you choose not to believe it, honestly it's fine!! Where have i kicked off?!?!
You brought up the "criticism" of the club over certain situations, I just said what it appeared to me that they "normally" do or behave in certain negative situations.
I've given you examples of the way the club acted, if you don't think that is true that's okay
I see your point Slizz. The club do cover the negative things up (Gold said Carroll was fit in 1-2 weeks, when he was actually out for a lot longer)
It was a surprise it all came out at once (Payet situation) but i think it was pure emotion from Bilic. He was the one who got him playing like that, talked him up, got him back in the France squad. Remember in the Euros Slav jumping on the table celebrating his goal?
Now its all been thrown back in his face. Refusing to play. Shocking. He's let Bilic and the club down. Im glad Bilic came out and told the truth.
Comments
I would imagine almost every player at every club has a price.
Why come out like this?
Not like the club at all, they cover most things up
Perhaps Slav had enough and was left to deal with it and that's how he felt at the time
;hmm
Anyway ;wave
I don't know if you can say the club cover most things up, when one of the regular criticisms of the owners is that they don't shut up and it causes people embarrassment.
Length of Andy Carroll's injuries, Arbeloa fall out with Slav
Vs
Telling the world our transfer targets and how much we've bid
Perhaps I should've worded it better
Cover most "negative" things up
;ok
and where is the evidence they covered up the length of Carroll's injuries? Honest question, as nothing I've read has said that other than like opinion pieces ok Claret & Hugh.
Where did I say it was a criticism? (First time round)
I'm just saying what they seem to normally do in these situations, they've covered up other stuff including Sakho meltdowns as well, but with Payet it's come to the front, im just curious as to why, did Slav have enough with the player the board all of them?
Carroll's injury was 4-6 weeks yet it took months and they didn't want to release that info because it was carroll again and a negative along with what was going on at the stadium at the time
Arbeloa was reported as having a knock before palace away (3 at the back) and never had an injury update mentioned until he suddenly returned in a game where we had no choice but to play him, he then got a proper injury (severe bruising?) The first knock wasn't real he'd fallen out with Slav.
Sorry I can't give you a quote and I'm not going down that road again
;ok
It's funny to me that you love to prod at people and wind up but the second some questions your high and all powerful word (not even aggressively, I should add) you kick off.
What you'll notice through all of the comments I've made about this whole saga, is that I believe he has family issues. My point has always been that ther are ways to deal with things. I don't see this as something you can beat the owners for.
But you go for it, pal.
;ok
(I can say what I like it I end it with a thumbs up, right?)
I'm not questioning what your opinion is, I'm just telling you mine, that's it. If you choose not to believe it, honestly it's fine!! Where have i kicked off?!?!
You brought up the "criticism" of the club over certain situations, I just said what it appeared to me that they "normally" do or behave in certain negative situations.
I've given you examples of the way the club acted, if you don't think that is true that's okay
You know what I was going to walk away yesterday and probably should've done, well now I am, because if I'm having these words with someone like you then something is wrong somewhere, so I'll leave, it must be me.
;thumbsup
HAMMERS DOUBT MARSEILLE BID
West Ham have told Dimitri Payet they will not sell him on the cheap, privately doubting Marseille’s ability to meet their £30m asking price.
That’s according to The Guardian, who report the Hammers are willing to keep Payet at the club through to the end of the season if necessary.
Marseille’s second offer of £20m was turned down earlier this week.
1. Pragmatism: Payet was 100% clear and determined he won't play for West Ham ever again, and Slav recognises that his efforts to change Payet's mind have failed. So there's no way it can be hidden and no point, as it will become clear soon enough.
2. Frankness: Slav knew that the 1st question in the presser would be about player availability, so just got on with telling them the situation before they asked.
3. Damage limitation: They decided to get it out there as soon as the situation became irreversible, to avoid all the rumour and gossip that would annoy the fans and make more negative waves about the club.
4. Honesty: because it's the truth.
1. They are the only ones who want him.
2. He is the sort of person who doesn't adapt well to new places and languages, and wants the safety and security of what he knows.
It was a surprise it all came out at once (Payet situation) but i think it was pure emotion from Bilic. He was the one who got him playing like that, talked him up, got him back in the France squad. Remember in the Euros Slav jumping on the table celebrating his goal?
Now its all been thrown back in his face. Refusing to play. Shocking. He's let Bilic and the club down. Im glad Bilic came out and told the truth.