Whispers

Eye watering cost to sack Nuno revealed as board drag their feet | West Ham News

|
Image for Eye watering cost to sack Nuno revealed as board drag their feet | West Ham News

Speculation around Nuno Espírito Santo’s future at West Ham has intensified amid the club’s prolonged winless run and growing fan frustration. With pressure mounting, a wave of rumours has circulated online claiming that the Portuguese coach could be dismissed without compensation.

This was news that Claret & Hugh reported on in October 2025, when one well placed external source informed us “If he is sacked this season, he won’t get a pay off. The compensation only begins from next season.”

In light of such an unusual assertion, we recently approached a high ranking source for clarification, though they declined to comment.

According to publicly available contract information, Nuno signed a two‑year deal running from 2025 to 2027, with a base salary of approximately £4.5 million per year.

While the exact terms are confidential, Premier League norms combined with the reported salary usually allow for a reasonable estimate.

Under normal circumstances Nuno would be due the remainder of his annual salary up to the end of the contract, potentially reduced by any negotiated settlement, and then offset if he takes another job soon (standard mitigation clause)

When Nuno left Tottenham Hotspur in November 2021 according to a report in the Sun this cost a whopping £14m as he departed mid-season, yet ironically could have left for nothing if Spurs had not finished in the top six at the end of the season.

Based on his reported £4.5 million West Ham salary, even a reduced settlement would typically reach the upper end of seven figures: another eye watering payout for the Hammers’ board. However with Rui Barbosa the only external addition to his backroom staff, any further compensation costs would be minimal.

As it stands, all of the above is immaterial as reports indicate that despite fan pressure, West Ham’s hierarchy has opted to stick with Nuno for now rather than make a change – little wonder with that huge compensation payout.

With the club facing relegation there is mounting pressure to pull the rip cord on the ill fated appointment, yet Nuno will be in the dug out for West Ham’s FA Cup home game against QPR.

Share this article

I have been a season ticket holder since the late eighties, so experienced the highs and lows of being a West Ham supporter. I previously wrote for OLAS and have contributed to a number of football publications in the past.

9 comments

  • Addo76 says:

    What % of fans want Nuno out? and what % does it need to be to be deemed fan pressure. I believe Nuno is the one to get us out of this but also the one to get us out of the championship if we go down as he has been there before. I am staying positive until mathematically impossible to stay up. That’s the excitement of the premier league, will it all hinge on West Ham vs Leeds, last game of season, I hope it doesn’t but if it does, what a game it will be.

  • DJ says:

    ‘Sacked’ these days effectively means gardening leave in most cases, so the manager continues to get paid his salary until he gets another job. It’s rare to have a large lump sum payout.

  • WesthamtilIdie says:

    The Geezer writing up the contract should be fired, An Idiot would have placed a performance related sacking in place (Avergae points total + over 10 games… No compensation. if you surpass then £££ Bonus.

    Numpties all of them!!

  • Dave says:

    How not to run a football club by Sully just went into volume 17

  • Kenny Irons says:

    What’s the point of sacking Nuno ? won’t make the slightest difference.
    Players seem to already have accepted their fate with their apathetic attitude.
    Sullivan will only appoint from his pool of useless out of work managers as he usually does.
    That’s why we’re in this situation.

  • Martin61 says:

    Is this an I’ll fated appointment or an appointed fated to fail.
    We have an inadequate squad, no strike force to speak of (Neither Fulkrug nor Wilson have the bodies to survive many full games not to say a season) and Nuno has been denied his backroom squad.
    Yes there have been some head scratching decisions (inverted full backs and the Soucek/Irving midfield, plus most think Wilson should have had a bit more game time without risking his body too much) but have they cost us too many points?

    Nuno has started playing the youth, which the majority of us crave, we seem a more balanced structured team with an increasing identity. We do struggle a bit upfront but it’s our defence which is the biggest issue and even now we don’t seem close to getting it sorted. Sully loves buying a forward or two (well, getting towards 60 now!) but he’s never keen on spending money nor time on getting defenders.

    Unless a bare minimum of one (I would argue two) strong, confident centre half is in place in the next 3 weeks we are doomed and we may already be destined for the drop. I can’t see the point of changing manager. The player ‘unrest’ will reflect the losing of games and confidence, deflecting blame but may also be due to the fact Nuno can’t spend the 1:1 time he seems to like because he is trying to be the Head Coach and specialist coach on various aspects of the game.

    Ultimately, the blame lies with one person. The one man in authority who has been here 15 years. Until he is no longer involved in running the club, we are not going to fulfill our potential, indeed we will struggle to remain anywhere near our potential. Go Sullivan, just go.

  • Taffyhammer says:

    Nuno needs backing with coaching and suitable playing staff. Absolutely no point in dispensing with his services just to replace him with somebody who will also need similar backing.

    West Ham United can not keep repeating the same mistake and expecting a better outcome.

    COYI

    • johnharry66 says:

      Couldn’t agree more! I’d also add that Nuno has extensive experience of the league. I think he’s by some margin our best hope.

Comments are closed.