Quantcast
7 Comments

Arthur’s four year deal – an alternative view

Maybe I’m just a cynic but like others, no doubt, I still can’t see a seriously positive reason for handing Arthur Masuaku a new four year deal.

It seems unfair after yesterday quite appalling display by the team to focus on any player for criticism because they all deserved to be pilloried in a big way.

However, my thoughts turned back to Arthur as I saw him pulled inside out and backwards for the first and probably, critical, goal.

Yes Roberto should have done better but Arthur should have done a LOT better.

We were assured at the time the new four years was offered  it was because he has a big part to play in our future and, on the face of it, with his contract coming to an end next summer, this would be the natural time to do so I guess.

However, it may not have necessarily been for the sort of reasons some may have considered, as I can’t see how his form over the last two and a half years will have justified an extension equal in years to that of an American presidency!

Yesterday’s considerable cock up  wasn’t the first and much as I hope otherwise, I doubt whether it will be the last because his history tells us differently.

So why four years!

Could it be that with just a few months left on his deal there would have been no chance of getting any sort of fee for him but that with a few years tagged on he won’t be going anywhere on a near free.

Like I said, maybe I’m just a terrible old cynic but, I honestly can’t see him still being at the club in nearly five years time.

About Hugh5outhon1895

Hugh Southon is a lifelong Iron and the founding editor of ClaretandHugh. He is a national newspaper journalist of many years experience and was Bobby Moore's 'ghost' writer during the great man's lifetime. He describes ClaretandHugh as "the Hammers daily newspaper!" Follow on Twitter @hughsouthon
 

7 comments on “Arthur’s four year deal – an alternative view

  1. who’s going to take him off our hands?

  2. Four years contract for masuaku is an absolute disgrace!!!

  3. MP has a lot to answer for, didn’t we learn from the Andy Carroll saga!!!!
    2 years max would have been debatable.
    He is NOT A DEFENDER for pity sake.
    Even Zabaleta 1 Yr extension debatable… No pace whatsoever.
    COYI

  4. Poor judgement for this and the lengthy Cresswell extension.I don’t see this as an MP decision.

  5. So somebody at the club decided Lanzini is still the same player he was- based on only a handful of unconvincing performances- which he isn’t. Masuaku has been judged to be be NOT the same player who couldn’t defend to save his life. And he is. Therefore both get bumper contracts. Doesn’t inspire confidence does it? But does help to explain why this season will end up the same as the last three, except the good bit came in the early part of the season for a change.

  6. Masuaku is a serious liability. I cannot understand why we signed him in the first place & I don’t understand why he was given a four year extension. He simply is unable to defend – full stop. He will always deliver these sort of performances, because he is unable to do anything else. The only thing he has going for him is his trickery & crossing ability in an attacking role – but I don’t think that he isgood at this, either. In any case, we have other players for that role. I am quite serious when I say that I am at least as good a defender as he is ; & I am 70 years old !

Comments are closed.