Foreign owners are not the problem; idiots are

After two months without a win and yet another customary second half collapse, West Ham’s relegation at the weekend was hardly unexpected. Unfortunately, neither was the appalling way in which the Hammers’ board dismissed Avram Grant shortly after the final whistle on Sunday.

Gold and Sullivan

The exact circumstances surrounding Grant’s departure have been the source of much rumour and debate; some claim he was sacked in the tunnel immediately after the game, whilst others believe Karren Brady’s televised post-match chat with Dave Whelan in the directors box was to request a room to use in order to hand Grant his P45. Whichever scenario is true - if any - it seems like yet another tactless act from West Ham’s board, who must now surely take their fair share of blame for the Hammers’ disastrous season.

That Grant was sacked is not the issue here. His record as manager of the club was desperately poor, with good cup runs masking alarming league form. With relegation confirmed following the 3-2 defeat at Wigan, he simply had to go. But why couldn’t the board have waited until Monday morning? Why couldn’t they allow the man, who was clearly hurting, the chance to collect his thoughts over a glass of wine and take a bit of time out of the glare of the media? 

Just because he failed in his task to keep West Ham up, does not mean he warrants humiliation. When the fans have asked for him to be sacked, it’s not because they want to see the man hung out to dry, it’s because they want someone in that will return the team to winning ways; no-one asked for a sacrificial lamb.

The actions of Gold, Sullivan and Brady have brought shame on West Ham United. They have shown a lack of class that many fans at Upton Park will not forget - even if they would not disagree with the decision. But this weekend’s events are unfortunately typical of a board that has misunderstood passion for posturing, and so far managed to oversee the dismissal of two managers and a relegation in the space of 18 months in charge.

Make no mistake, the good will afforded to Gold and Sullivan for rescuing the club when close to financial oblivion  has well and truly gone now. The fans are tired of their constant interference in team affairs, the murky and undignified way in which the Olympic Stadium bid was handled and their constant airing of the club’s dirty laundry in the media. With them at the helm, West Ham have become a club that few people respect anymore.

All of this makes you wonder if West Ham made the right choice in selecting Gold and Sullivan as the winners of a four-way bidding process last year, which also included representatives from the USA and the Far East. At the time, Gold and Sullivan presented themselves as the only bidders with the club’s interests at heart; they were fans from their childhood and knew what the club meant to the Upton Park faithful. Heck, David Gold even trained for the club as a youngster; what could go wrong?

For many, the clincher was that they were English. West Ham had been stung by foreign owners before with the Icelandic bank collapse remember, so surely there was no way they could risk bringing in another group of nasty amateur foreign mercenaries? And what about those Hicks and Gillett fellows? Only in it for themselves that lot. And Shinawatra; the Glazers; Alexandre Gaydamak, they’re all the same. Or so the general feeling amongst English football fans seems to be.

And yet no-one seems to mention the list of greedy and incompetent English owners of football clubs do they? Doug Ellis was hardly revered by Aston Villa fans during his time in charge, and I’m sure not many Manchester City supporters hanker for the days of Peter Swailes. West Ham themselves had Terry Brown, who remains a hate figure amongst the fans for sitting firmly in the back seat unless the opportunity arose to make a few quid on a home grown player.

No, the foreign owners are not the problem; idiots are the problem. And West Ham have two of them in charge. 

The nationality on someone’s passport should not dictate whether they can run a sporting organisation or not. True, there are plenty of examples of foreign owners that have failed their clubs, but so too are there examples where they have moved their clubs forwards. Ellis Short for example, is beginning to establish Sunderland as a top flight fixture in a way they haven’t been for generations; Randy Lerner, for all his failings, has certainly improved Aston Villa’s standing since the days of Doug Ellis; and whisper it quietly, but the Glazers have actually overseen one of Manchester United’s most successful periods in their history.

There remains a “little Englander” approach to club ownership, that masks the real failings in football organisation. That the owners are not English should not be our concern; our concern should be ensuring fans have a voice and are represented at the upper echelons of clubs’ structures - regardless of the nationality of the owner. 

Just because someone is not English does not mean they will burn the club’s history books and run away with the safe under their arm. But too many people are too easily assured by the fact that prospective owners are local boys done good. With West Ham due to move away from their home in the next couple of seasons and classless acts such as the dismissal of Grant; Gold and Sullivan could end up doing more damage to West Ham’s history than any foreigner ever could.