The news from earlier today broken on Claret and Hugh that Niclas Fullkrug is neither fit nor settled in the UK hides a greater malaise at West Ham ‘United’. The source quoted by Sean Whetstone, in effect, points the finger firmly at Tim Steidten for the Fullkrug signing, stating that :”He [Fullkrug] really hasn’t settled in UK. Tim said he was a real pro and a grafter before he signed.”
And:”Let’s see what happens in next few weeks”.
£27 million spent on a 31 year old. 61 minutes on the pitch. I can only imagine the conversations now going on in Hammers’ boardroom.
But it is not this one isolated example. The Luis Guilherme signing at over £25.5 million for an eighteen year old has had similar results for West Ham so far – absolutely zero. Eleven minutes as a substitute.
A total of £52.5 million spent for an unproductive 76 minutes of play which works out at £690,000 per minute played. Per minute. Just let that sink in for a minute. (A very expensive minute). Almost half the transfer budget ‘splurged’ ( being polite here) up against the wall.
Only at West Ham. In any other line of work, heads would roll for such irresponsible profligacy. Clubs with the financial clout of Manchester City, Newcastle United or ‘old-days’ Chelsea might be able to afford that kind of excess. But in these days of PSR no club can just go and shake the magic money tree (also known as the rich owner’s pockets) until another couple of hundred million falls out for more players.
Of course, it is easy in hindsight: Spending big money does not insure players against injury.
But buying high-risk ‘extremes’ – youth with zero track record, or over-thirties with several hundred days on the sick list – for such enormous sums should surely be questioned by us as fans and by the club’s owners.
Trouble is, it was one of the owners, I think, who installed Steidten to ‘oversee’ the transfers and avoid repeats of the Moyes’ era waste on players like Scamacca, Benrahma and Vlasič who all lost the club tens of millions. How’s that working out then?
