By Kris Gonzo | Senior West Ham Columnist (Follow on X).
Well, after what was a lengthy will-they-won’t-they build-up to the Panorama documentary featuring David Sullivan, the BBC finally aired the programme that had been looming over West Ham for some time.
I must admit, I initially thought the feature had been pulled at the last minute when I found myself watching Springwatch at 8pm.
As it turned out, the mistake was entirely mine.
I was watching the wrong BBC channel rather than witnessing some last-minute rescheduling following a challenge from the former West Ham chairman’s legal team.
A Difficult Watch
As for the documentary itself, it was a hard watch.
A very hard watch.
And it certainly did not paint Sullivan in a favourable light.
Earlier this week, Sullivan said in a statement published on the official West Ham website:
“I will be suing the BBC for libel, along with any other media outlet that repeats any libelous allegations.”
With that in mind, it would be foolish to repeat any of the claims or allegations featured within the 30-minute Panorama broadcast.
What I can say is that the programme had an undeniably uncomfortable feel to it and will undoubtedly leave many people with further questions.
No Way Back
What feels clear to me is that there can surely be no route back for Sullivan at West Ham following the events of the past week.
It will also have made for deeply uncomfortable viewing for those associated with him.
The documentary carried an unedifying tone throughout and I suspect its impact will continue to be felt over the coming days.
As for West Ham, the club needs to leave this controversy firmly in its wake, comply fully with any safeguarding enquiries and demonstrate that it is moving in a different direction under new leadership.
I would be very surprised if there are any circumstances under which Sullivan takes his place in the directors’ box again.
And, if that proves to be the case, West Ham will be better served without the cloud of controversy hanging over the football club.
Who would like to go first in listing the crimes that Sullivan is allegedly guilty of in relation to the Panorama content? Sleazebag, yes, but criminal? Perhaps we should just be thankful he has gone and stick to football.
Bearing in mind when these incidents are alleged to have occured one would argue they are of their time and that behaviour, as distasteful as it was, was not unusual of men with power, then or now. I believe there is little the police can act on there and the producers know that. So the intent of the programme is to flush out more victims, to see if there is enough evidence and momentum to charge him. The FA questioning West Ham is just performative garbage as most of this is alleged to have occured before his involvement with the club. Let’s hope they investigate and if they find evidence charge, but they may well struggle to do that.
The CPS may well ask if it is in the public interest to move forward if no crime has been committed?
I can’t help wondering how the Karen Brady quick exit stage left fits into this story. Given that at the very young age of 20 she became a director of Sport Newspapers, connections seem to be quite obvious. I’m not suggesting she has done anything untoward, but neither had others connected with Sullivan that appeared in the Panorama programme last night. Apparently, Sullivan bought Birmingham City at Brady’s suggestion. She wanted to run the club, and was promptly installed.
Under the circumstances, her hands have stayed remarkably clean.
Karen Brady is an intelligent individual and I don’t believe she is guilty of anything untoward with respect to these allegations.
Brady was extremely vocal in the House of Lords opposing the Independent Football Regulator.
Tara Warren worked closely with Karen as an Executive Director. With Tara joining the IFR only months before Karen departed, I do think this and the Sullivan allegations resulted in her exiting the club before it came out.
Jumping from the “happy ship” before it gets torpedoed makes sense to me.
West Ham back on the front pages where we belong!
The Independent Football Regulator is now looking in to David Sullivan.
The IFR has Tara Warren as a Non Exec Director. This is the same lady that spent 17 years working closely with Karen Brady at West Ham.
As a fan, I find these allegations deeply concerning and damaging to the reputation of the club. Right now, the most important thing is that any allegations are properly investigated and that those involved are held accountable if wrongdoing is proven.
The club has become a subject of ridicule because of the negative publicity, and that is frustrating as the focus right now should be on returning to the PL. If the relevant authorities conclude that ownership is not fit and proper, then that would be a blessing in disguise. A fresh start could help restore confidence and move the club forward.
I have also long questioned how senior figures associated with the club, including Karen Brady, reconcile their public advocacy for women’s empowerment with their association with individuals involvement with the adult industry and facing such serious allegations. That is a legitimate question, although it is important not to prejudge anyone before the facts are established.
Most importantly, if these allegations are true, then my thoughts are with the victims. They deserve to be heard, treated with respect, and receive justice through the proper legal process. As supporters, we should want transparency, accountability, and a club that reflects values we can be proud of.
Brilliantly put
Other investigative journalists will already be on the case, others may be motivated into making allegations.
There will be follow up articles particularly in next weekends Sunday papers.
Anything that diminishes Sullivans control has had a positive outcome.
Like you say Gonzo, have to be careful of the possible legal ramifications. Very uncomfortable watching and as others have commented, this may be the prompt for more to come forward. As a fan, I can’t help thinking about the possible upside but I also hope there will be justice for any victims if these claims are proven.
I long for the day when west ham’s image is not tarnished
Really disappointed in the BBC. If this is all they have then I’m worried we haven’t seen the back of him. I am pretty sure one or more of last night’s allegations have already been in tabloids. They’ve brought little or nothing new to the table. Hopefully though, just bringing attention to it will create a domino effect.
I do not like Sullivan but what did he do wrong nothing
I found the thing totally underwhelming the usual panorama rubbish , just like panorama is known for ? , I’m not defending the guy, or condemning him, it was a programme about unsubstantiated claim, a case of his word against their word , if you hate the guy you believe it or you wait until the burden of proof has been proved? Then justice speaks for itself without personal prejudice
Really? The mind boggles…
I wonder how many of those Sunday Sport page three girls actually made it into the newspaper by being a special friend.
Sacha Wall has been talking about the Essex Boys murders for a while. As she allegedly worked at Raquels nightclub. Funny thing is nobody remembers her.
I feel no worse about this bloke than I did before I watched it. That’s mainly because my opinion of him isn’t that high anyway. What revelations came out were nothing I hadn’t imagined was going on anyway. Still the club has ultimately got rid of him and that’s all that matters to me.
If that is the best the BBC can come up with I don’t understand why they bothered. Hardly compares to Saville or Harris who they lauded for years. Or even Al Fayed
Can’t see any prosecutions coming out of it, neither will Sully sue them
The only winners in this are West Ham who have got rid of an owner who proved to be inept at running the club
I think that’s the whole point! Saville only had some people saying this and that until the documentary aired people started to come forward.. also it exposes those that have worked with him for years as they must have known what he was up to
BBC underwhelming half hour of staged nonsense.
Nothing to see here. No allegations just innuendo. What has the world of serious journalism come to?
John Major next week?
That was my take. A p*rn baron accused of being horrible to women. Who’d have thought.
Should have turned the volume up, you’d of heard the allegations
There wasn’t any, not really.”Allegedly” He was a chancer who tried to get sexual favours out of the adult models working for him. If that’s worthy a prosecution then the courts are going to be very busy
I can’t see any legal action he wants to take having any hope whatsoever. I wonder if more women will feel emboldened to come forward now.
Found it strange that the working relationship between Baroness Brady’s father and Sullivan not mentioned