It hasn’t escaped my notice in recent days that Claret & Hugh has come under fire from some quarters—accused of trying to throw Kyle Macaulay and Graham Potter under the bus.
The theory goes that we’re somehow shielding David Sullivan and Karren Brady by denying their involvement in transfer dealings. Let me be crystal clear-it’s nonsense- both are involved in transfers and will be entirely to blame if the window fails in the coming months. . . and I fear that is precisely what will happen.
It was C&H who broke the story of Brady’s involvement in the botched January negotiation for Eziquiel Banzuzi which did not reflect well at all.
Most Read on West Ham News
As for the current transfer window, our understanding is that Potter and Macaulay will identify targets and speak to agents and players, but David Sullivan will close the deals.
If anyone’s throwing Macaulay under the bus, it’s the club. Expecting a rookie head of recruitment to meet agents without any indication of available funds is, in my opinion, ludicrous. He needs support and transfer funds, not an empty chequebook.
Kyle Macaulay doesn’t have the funds to recruit
Lopetegui blame game
At present, the club are a shambles and nobody on the board gets clean hands in this. I personally believe scrapping the Director of Football role was a flawed decision—but only time will tell I guess. And let’s be honest, the worst decision last season wasn’t just removing Tim Steidten and not replacing him—it was hiring Julen Lopetegui, a choice that seemed to be backed by no one outside the West Ham boardroom.
As for Potter, the views I express are my own. The club continues to back him publicly—but it’s financial support that truly matters.
And that’s where my concern lies: West Ham can’t afford two bad managerial appointments in a row. If Potter and Macaulay are not backed properly, with experienced negotiators, money and a clear structure, the risk is they’ll fail—not due to their ability, but due to the lack of infrastructure and funds.
Say what you like about Steidten, but he got deals done. The idea of Sullivan, Potter, Macaulay, and Brady leading our transfer dealings doesn’t exactly inspire confidence.
When I say Potter and Macaulay are learning on the job, it’s because they are—and not because I’m looking to undermine them. If they fail, it’ll be because the club didn’t give them the tools to succeed. West Ham had an opportunity to hire a top level manager after David Moyes and I believe we squandered an opportunity to appoint an experienced DOF after Steidten.
There’s no anti-Potter/Macaulay agenda here—only concern. I’m not going to pretend I think they’re the right men for the job though. I fear the pair have been over-promoted and were the cheap available options. I hope I’m wrong.
The idea that Claret & Hugh is protecting the board is laughable. Everyone who writes for this site is entitled to their own opinion. But it is entirely possible to be concerned about the management structure AND the board at the same time which is where I am.
And my opinion? The club is a mess, so many of our rivals seem to have moved 20 years ahead of us in infrastructure and recruitment during a short period of time. Look at the likes Brighton (sophisticated scouting), Bournemouth (£50m state of the art training complex), Aston Villa (the largest team of scouts and Analysts in the UK). Everton are moving ahead and even Leeds United have grand plans for their future whilst traditionally smaller clubs like Fulham look to be in better health than us.
Buy cheap by twice
West Ham always seems to opt for the cheap managerial option instead of best-in-class. That’s my real worry right now. If Potter is to succeed, he’ll need financial backing—not a rigid sell-to-buy policy. I do wonder if the new gaffer really knew what he was letting himself in for at The London Stadium which must seem practically medieval compared to Brighton’s slick operation.
As I wrote last week, there are ways around PSR and cash-flow issues. If Sullivan, Kretinsky, Tripp Smith—or anyone else—wanted to inject money into the club, they could. They just don’t seem willing.
Then there’s the stadium issue. At Upton Park, we could weather relegation. But at the London Stadium? Relegation would be catastrophic. That venue would become a financial millstone around our neck.
West Ham would struggle to bounce back with a half empty LS
Everton’s new stadium will bring in an extra £40 million a year. That’s the level we’re up against and the ‘deal of the century’ is beginning to look worse with each passing year. While other clubs race ahead with strategy and infrastructure, West Ham risk being left behind.
So please, don’t confuse my concern for our management team with criticism for criticism’s sake. I’m a worried fan—and as concerned as anyone every time I hear we have no transfer budget until we sell. After all, world class team in a world class stadium is what we were promised right? The current messaging seems to revolve around sustainability and selling the family silver.
Once again, I hope the club are playing playing the pauper before spending big on players to help Potter build the team of his dreams.
But make no mistake: if Potter and Macaulay do fail, the blame will lie squarely with the board.