Wednesday, May 12

Lack of class

Zola was sacked for “gross misconduct” according to today’s papers. This means he receives no compensation from the club and the case will now be in the hands of Franco’s lawyers.

This is a particularly shoddy way of treating the nicest man in football — a man who even made coffee for the reporters outside his house yesterday.

Apparently Zola’s gross misconduct is the extremely mild comments he made after Sullivan announced to the press that the whole squad was up for sale minus Scott Parker. Zola said that Mark Noble or Valon Behrami would not be very happy reading this.

Yes, there were some sound footballing reasons for sacking Zola. But if so, be honest about it and give him some compensation for breaching his contract.

The whole episode betrays a lack of class, as does the fact that Sullivan and Gold got Karren Brady to do the sacking rather than appear themselves.

Worse still, it’s surely an unfair dismissal case we’ll lose. Any manager in the country would have responded to the comments Sullivan made behind their back. Even if we save a few bob, is it worth the damage to the club’s reputation?

What has happened to the club that gave us John Lyall, Ron Greenwood and high principles? One thing West Ham fans appreciate is a sense of fair play.

This lot would probably dismiss Trevor Brooking as a troublemaker.


matt said...

Have they forgotten the millions still owed to Curbishly for his unfair dismissal. The Club Landlords obviously see themselves as ruthless, but are looking incompetent.

I wonder how season ticket sales will go, considering we have no manager, and no idea which players will be there next season.

Pete May said...

Yes, it smacks of Curbishley all over again. An employment lawyer in one of the papers today reckons the Davids will be hoping Zola gets another job before the case is settled and that way the Club Landlords will have to pay much less compensation.

But if he's sensible Zola will stay put at home and surely be awarded his £1.9 million.

30-Something Gamer said...

Much of what G&S had done since they took over, seemed to have been aimed at GZ resigning (and so no compo). When he didn't, they weasled out a very tenuous breach of contract claim to avoid the pay out. This is bollocks - GZ will win (or the club will settle) any case he brings on this paper-thin 'reason'.

Curbishley was smart enough to avoid getting a job before his case was disposed of, to maximise his pay-out. GZ would be wise to do the same.

I have no problem with them getting rid of a manager (personally, I'd have given him some cash support in the summer and then let him have a proper go) but for Christ's sake have the class to just sack him and honour the severance clause in his contract. Come back Terry Brown :)

Pete May said...

I agree, even Terry Brown would have handled this better. I can see why we might need a new gaffer (and he was going to go as soon as they sacked Nani) but this penny pinching is counter productive and just makes West Ham look like a heartless club, who will now be sued by two managers in a row.

Anyone with strong principles — like Roy Hodgson — will be put off by the way the Club Landlords have treated a decent man.

matt said...

It is being said that some managers who had been approached, including Mark Hughes and Steve McLaren, were just not interested in working with this regime. Obviously Avram Grant is used to off-field chaos and mouthy owners...