According to recent rumours Alan Pardew has been keeping his eye on John Hartson, Dean Bowditch and a chap called Glen Johnson.

Hartson I'm sure we all know about so I won't go into it. Apparently Johnson has got into Mourinho's bad books by having a bit of a tantrum and hurting his hand, and Jose has decided to get rid of the young right-back. Rumours have it that Pardew is interested in bringing the Academy graduate back to Upton Park in January, but he will first have to fend off Southampton who want to take Johnson on loan.

Pardew is also interested in Ipswich's highly rated teen striker Dean Bowditch, but Joe Royle wants to boost his midfield so Carl Fletcher and Gavin Williams could be used as part of a swap-and-cash deal. To be honest I can't see Fletcher leaving the club just yet as we would have too little cover for Mullins and Reo-Coker, but on the other hand Fletcher hasn't played for the Irons yet this season and has only just returned from loan.

Posted by whubris at 10:26 am ... View Post ... View 1 comments

 Dave said...
Bringing Glen back to West Ham will be a popular move and I would certainly be fairly pleased with it.

John Hartson is probably not the sort of player we should be bringing to Upton Park but if the money is right then maybe it will work. Hartson and Marlon would cause lots of problems up front but I'm not sure I like the temptation to lob high balls up to the big fat b@stard. Benni would be my preferred choice but maybe pardew wants to spread the cash to other areas.

Dean Bowditch - wrong Ipswich teenager! We should've snapped up Darren Bent in the summer before he signed for Charlton - look how well he's performed.

Comment posted on Sun Oct 30, 09:51:00 am

 

...Post a Comment ... Go to Forum

Alan Pardew tells Glenn Moore of The Independent how he uses the software product ProZone to help prepare for West Ham's big matches. From http://sport.independent.co.uk

It was two and a half years ago, when I was managing Reading, that I became a ProZone convert. The system is not cheap but we managed to book it for the play-off matches against Wolves. The first leg finished 2-1 to Wolves and when I began going through the match on ProZone ahead of the second game we noticed this connection between Lee Naylor, at left-back, and Nathan Blake in attack which we had not dealt with. I remember we thought "we must block that in the second game". I could remember it happening in the first game but had not noticed to that extent. It does throw up things like that now and again. I remember thinking "the first club I get to which can afford it, I'll get it".

For scouting the opposition and analysing your team it gives you a wealth of information you cannot get with the naked eye, like those passing patterns. It is a supplement to your judgement. I don't make decisions on players just on it. Sometimes you look at the stats and think "there's no way I can play him, he looks that poor", but you have to look at the game, how it evolved and how much involvement he had in it. It is not a system you could base the club on but it reinforces some things and opens your eyes to others.

It also tracks the movement of your own team. A manager might say "you should all move together" and you can see if you are or you aren't. If you have a breakaway and you are still camped on the edge of your box it is not what you want to see. It can highlight those things.

We use it for an opposition report ahead of all matches and in a defensive meeting on what happened in the last game. I like to use it to cite the positive. It would be easy to just point errors out. It is not there to be smartarse, it is there to show the strength of your performance and it can be as good at showing positives as negatives. It's a more sophisticated version of video. Some of the better managers I had would compile a tape showing the good things you'd done in a game: in my case, it might be about three and half minutes long.

The scouting value varies. It's obviously good for set-plays but can also highlight general play. We played Man City recently and ProZone showed the discipline in their team, the fact they do not move much out of their holes and are very solid. It showed when they attack you they do so in a certain manner and they have an out ball, [Antoine] Sibierski on the right-hand side. If they are in trouble and can't play through you they hit him: you have to be aware of that. But most of that we would have scouted anyway.

Arsenal was more interesting because we worked out a way that might work better for us in terms of how they played. It worked for us on the day [West Ham drew 1-1]. I'm not telling anyone what it was, though. We have to play them again this season.

Obviously, we know other teams will be using it to work us out. That means we have to evolve, but a team does that anyway. The team that starts a season never ends it.

It was two and a half years ago, when I was managing Reading, that I became a ProZone convert. The system is not cheap but we managed to book it for the play-off matches against Wolves. The first leg finished 2-1 to Wolves and when I began going through the match on ProZone ahead of the second game we noticed this connection between Lee Naylor, at left-back, and Nathan Blake in attack which we had not dealt with. I remember we thought "we must block that in the second game". I could remember it happening in the first game but had not noticed to that extent. It does throw up things like that now and again. I remember thinking "the first club I get to which can afford it, I'll get it".

For scouting the opposition and analysing your team it gives you a wealth of information you cannot get with the naked eye, like those passing patterns. It is a supplement to your judgement. I don't make decisions on players just on it. Sometimes you look at the stats and think "there's no way I can play him, he looks that poor", but you have to look at the game, how it evolved and how much involvement he had in it. It is not a system you could base the club on but it reinforces some things and opens your eyes to others.

It also tracks the movement of your own team. A manager might say "you should all move together" and you can see if you are or you aren't. If you have a breakaway and you are still camped on the edge of your box it is not what you want to see. It can highlight those things.

We use it for an opposition report ahead of all matches and in a defensive meeting on what happened in the last game. I like to use it to cite the positive. It would be easy to just point errors out. It is not there to be smartarse, it is there to show the strength of your performance and it can be as good at showing positives as negatives. It's a more sophisticated version of video. Some of the better managers I had would compile a tape showing the good things you'd done in a game: in my case, it might be about three and half minutes long.

The scouting value varies. It's obviously good for set-plays but can also highlight general play. We played Man City recently and ProZone showed the discipline in their team, the fact they do not move much out of their holes and are very solid. It showed when they attack you they do so in a certain manner and they have an out ball, [Antoine] Sibierski on the right-hand side. If they are in trouble and can't play through you they hit him: you have to be aware of that. But most of that we would have scouted anyway.

Arsenal was more interesting because we worked out a way that might work better for us in terms of how they played. It worked for us on the day [West Ham drew 1-1]. I'm not telling anyone what it was, though. We have to play them again this season.

Obviously, we know other teams will be using it to work us out. That means we have to evolve, but a team does that anyway. The team that starts a season never ends it.

Posted by whubris at 10:32 am ... View Post ... View 2 comments

 Dave said...
It's a long enough article as it is without doubling up and pasting it twice ;-)

Comment posted on Sun Oct 30, 09:34:00 am

 

 whubris said...
Doh :-)

Comment posted on Sun Oct 30, 05:16:00 pm

 

...Post a Comment ... Go to Forum

(Cut n Paste from The Times Online, http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,277-1843318,00.html)

EVEN by the snail-paced standards of Soho Square, a year seems like a long time to wait for the outcome of a disrepute charge, but almost 12 months after their combustible Carling Cup tie, the FA yesterday found Chelsea and West Ham United guilty of failing to control their supporters.
The FA has succeeded in streamlining some elements of its disciplinary process in recent years, but speed has not been of the essence in this case.

West Ham's visit to Stamford Bridge on October 27 last year was marred by violence, with Mateja Kezman, Chelsea's goalscorer in their 1-0 win, being struck on the head by a missile and visiting supporters fighting with police in riot gear for 15 minutes after the final whistle, leading to both clubs being charged. Chelsea and West Ham denied the charges and requested personal hearings.

The FA says the delay was caused by their desire to deal with a case involving Millwall first, which sprang from the club's Carling Cup tie against Liverpool the previous evening. Last month, Millwall finally won their appeal against a £25,000 fine imposed by the FA for failing to ensure their spectators "refrained from racist and/or abusive behaviour".

Yesterday's ruling is not the end of the matter. The hearing was adjourned to hear pleas of mitigation from the clubs before the commission determines the punishment to be imposed. Both clubs can expect to be fined.

An FA statement said: "Charges against Chelsea and West Ham United for the behaviour of their supporters have been found to be proved. The two clubs were charged with failing to ensure that spectators, and/or persons purporting to be its supporters or followers, conducted themselves in an orderly fashion and refrained from threatening and/or violent and/or provocative behaviour."

Chelsea are expected to appeal, arguing that they acted with due diligence to prevent violence and that subsequent events were beyond their control, as well as pointing out that there has been no trouble at their ground in the past year.

Posted by whubris at 9:38 am ... View Post ... View 0 comments ...Post a Comment ... Go to Forum

Bolton have inflicted their second victory of the season over West Ham overnight in the Carling Cup thanks to a second-half strike from Jared Borgetti.

Fresh from signing a new five-year contract, Irons manager Alan Pardew did not play the full strength side that was hinted at before the match. Recent signing Clive Clarke made his debut at left-back, while Konchesky was moved into midfield. Collins, Ward, Dailly, and Bellion also started the match at the expense of Gabbidon, Ferdinand, Reo-Coker and Benayoun. Hislop, Repka, Mullins, Sheringham and Harewood rounded out the starting eleven, while Bywater, Williams, Newton, Fletcher, and Aliadiere made the bench. Bolton fielded a similarly weakened side.

West Ham dominated the early exchanges, with the lively Bellion shooting just over the bar. Soon afterwards Sheringham saw his shot deflected over, and Bellion had two more shots, both of them saved by the Bolton keeper Ian Walker. Konchesky later shot wide after his free-kick rebounded back to him, and then managed to put the ball in the net from a Bellion pass but was flagged offside.

Bolton had to be on their toes when Mullins set up Sheringham inside their box, but the Wanderers managed to clear the danger.

The first real scare for West Ham came as the clock ticked down in the first half when Ricardo Gardner was allowed time and space, but he dallied over the ball and West Ham cleared. Harewood had a shot blocked by the Bolton defence, and then Collins headed wide just before half time.

Early in the second half Hislop was called into action, saving a powerful shot from Fadiga, but a minute later the ball was in the net after Borgetti headed home a perfect Fadiga cross.

West Ham pressured Bolton and saw Konchesky's free-kick well tipped over by Walker, but also saw Kevin Nolan head over the bar and substitute Pedersen shoot off-target.

Substitute Aliadiere had a shot saved by Walker, and then Gardner shot wide when one-on-one with Hislop. Borgetti nearly got his second but contrived to shoot wide from close range. West Ham, despite having twice as many shots on target as Bolton, could not put the ball in the net and Bolton held on for the win.

West Ham will be disappointed to have lost a game, but will be consoled that they can now concentrate more on survival in the Premiership.

Posted by whubris at 8:56 am ... View Post ... View 0 comments ...Post a Comment ... Go to Forum

Nigel Reo-Coker has claimed that West Ham's second goal against Middlesbrough should not have stood - but neither should have Boro's consolation goal.

"The 'goal' that was awarded by the linesman was an unfortunate incident, no doubt about that," he told the Icons website (www.icons.com). "I saw it with my own eyes on the pitch and knew it hadn't crossed the line, and you could see from the reaction of all the West Ham players that we sensed it was probably not a goal. No one appealed for it.

"Luckily for us the linesman saw something the rest of us didn't and we accepted the goal. I don't feel guilty about it for two reasons though. Firstly because we thoroughly deserved the win, but also because Middlesbrough scored from a corner kick that should never have been awarded because the ball came off of one of their own players! Over the course of the 90 minutes I think we got just as much bad luck as Boro from the officials."

The hard-working midfielder felt that West Ham won the match on merit despite the controversy. "It's such a shame that our disputed second goal against Middlesbrough on Sunday overshadowed a very good performance by West Ham. No matter what anyone else says, we fully deserved to earn all three points from the match. We played well and I don't even think Boro could argue that we were the better side on the day."

The result puts the Hammers in ninth position in the Premiership table, and Reo-Coker is pleased with that. "The three points we deservedly picked up were really handy because the distance between ourselves and the teams at the bottom of the league has widened. Survival is all that matters for us this season, so the bigger the gap the better. It's now down to all of us to maintain our form and build on it."

Will West Ham play a weakened squad against Bolton in the Carling Cup match? "As far as I know the gaffer is taking a full strength side. We are going there to try and win. Having said that, I have to say the Carling Cup is just a bonus for us this season. Not many Premiership teams are taking the competition too seriously and we are probably one of them. We'd like to win it, but not at the expense of our place in the Premiership.

"This season is all about survival, even though we've had a decent start. Staying in the Premiership is all that we want to do. If we can do that, and win a trophy it will fantastic. What we don't want to do is win the Carling Cup and get relegated. Like I said before we are viewing the competition as a bonus."

Reo-Coker also commented on the rumours about Arsenal's interest in him. "I want to reassure West Ham fans that the newspaper story linking me with Arsenal this weekend was only paper talk as far as I am concerned. It's nice to be associated with a club of their stature but I don't think there is any substance in the story. Whatever I do, I won't get carried away with anything written about me or the team this season. It's what we do on the pitch that matters."

Posted by whubris at 9:31 am ... View Post ... View 0 comments ...Post a Comment ... Go to Forum

Chameleons are an interesting animal. They can change colour to blend in with their surroundings, which is quite a remarkable trait. They also have independent control of their eyes, which is to say, they can look in two directions at once.

Football officials are, in these respects, a little more limited. On the whole they do their best to be invisible on the pitch with regard to their decisions, and they do try to see everything simultaneously (particularly when calling offsides). Unfortunately, all officials registered to the Football Association belong to a species called Homo Sapiens, which can only see in one direction at a time and is, sadly, very fallible.

We saw an example of that against Middlesbrough. Suddenly the referee's assistant became very, very visible. The ball was thought to have crossed the line, when in fact it hadn't. It's unlikely that the linesman in question actually saw the ball while it was in Mark Schwartzer's arms, given that the keeper's body was between the ball and linesman at the time. (Officials, like all other humans, also lack X-ray vision.)

He made the call. It was a bad one. Instant uproar.

No matter how much training these officials get, they are going to make mistakes. Some say this is part of the charm of the sport. Others say that it takes away from the skill of the players by adding an unnecessary random element.

Well, why are we playing, and watching, football? For entertainment. What's entertaining about a football match? Obviously, watching two teams in a battle of might and mind. Determination, tactical prowess, skill, strength, and speed. That's entertaining.

Random elements add a different kind of entertainment - unpredictability. There's already a good deal of unpredictability in football. Each player could have the performance of his life, or have a nightmare of a game. The managers might get it right, or wrong. Nobody can predict the outcome of any game reliably and consistently or there'd be no such thing as bookies.

If you knew the outcome of a game, would you watch it?

I can't speak for anyone else, but I sure would. I often do, when I watch games I've taped on the VCR. Like I said: two teams in a battle of might and mind. Determination, tactical prowess, skill, strength, and speed. That's entertaining. It's not just about who wins, but about how they win.

So now I wonder, should we introduce technology to help the officials? As long as it doesn't interfere with the entertainment, I can't see why not. There's plenty of unpredictability in a game of football so I'm not concerned about removing that tiny element that is due to the officials being fallible.

The only other way it could spoil my enjoyment is by intervention into the game itself. Lengthy delays would spoil it. But as long as a decision could be made quickly, and correctly, how could it possibly affect the enjoyment of the game?

As I see it, these are the requirements for successful integration of technology into decision making in football:

(1) The referee is the focal point for all decisions, as far as the players and observers are concerned. I believe we can't have a big screen saying "GOAL" or "NO GOAL" - that takes away some of the referee's authority. The referee should be informed invisibly.
(2) Technology does not make decisions. Technology is used as another "eye" for the referee to observe what is taking place on the field. The referee uses this information to make a decision.
(3) Decisions are made quickly. Offsides need to be called almost instantly - this is difficult technologically but if we can't do it, then we shouldn't try. I reckon goals can have a delay of a couple of seconds at most. Sending-off offences can perhaps be delayed 10 seconds or so.

It follows that having a fifth official review video replays of incidents isn't going to work, except perhaps in the case of serious sending-off. I don't think replays will work for offside or goal-line decisions, simply because they can't be made quickly enough.

The new technology of having a transmitting chip inside the ball should work well, I think. The referee can be informed whether the ball crosses the line invisibly and instantly.

How can we use this same technology for offside decisions? I wonder if we could have transmitting chips embedded in the boots of the players to establish their positions on the field, and an accelerometer in the ball to detect when it's kicked. (A more advanced device could also detect when the location of the ball matches the location of a player.) If a player is offside at the moment the ball is kicked, then a gadget in the linesman's pocket can vibrate. It would be a challenging engineering task but it might be worth a try.

Maybe then the officials can see in two places at once, and become a little less visible.

Posted by whubris at 9:03 am ... View Post ... View 0 comments ...Post a Comment ... Go to Forum

Hayden Mullins has become the latest Hammer to sign a new contract after he inked a four-year deal with West Ham United. The 26-year-old midfielder has been rewarded for his superb midfield partnership with Nigel Reo-Coker, who has also signed a new deal in recent days.

Posted by whubris at 8:27 am ... View Post ... View 0 comments ...Post a Comment ... Go to Forum

* Danny Gabbidon has been named Welsh Footballer of the Year, while his teammate James Collins was voted Young (Welsh) Player of the Year. Gabbidon has impressed for both club and country in recent times, taking to the Premiership like a duck to water. Collins has been unable to break into the League squad so far but has performed well for Wales and will be a player to watch.

*The date for West Ham's clash with Bolton in the Carling Cup third round has been set. The match will be played on Wednesday, October 26, kicking off at 8pm.

Posted by whubris at 8:24 am ... View Post ... View 0 comments ...Post a Comment ... Go to Forum

Nigel Reo-Coker has signed a new five-year deal with West Ham, joining Marlon Harewood, Anton Ferdinand and Matty Etherington on the list of players who have recently signed long term deals.

Posted by whubris at 8:52 am ... View Post ... View 0 comments ...Post a Comment ... Go to Forum