Probably West Ham’s biggest need right now is not a goalkeeper, a winger or another defensive midfielder: Whilst important, additions to the squad in those positions will not prove pivotal in the relegation battle being fought out now.
Signing a new centre back to take the place of “Maxi-millon” Kilman could well make the difference to survival. £40 million Kilman has flopped yet been an almost ever-present, as West Ham simply don’t have any alternative options at centre back.
So, not surprisingly, the name at the front of everyone’s mind this window is that of Toulouse’s Charlie Cresswell whom, we are led to believe, chairman David Sullivan could have signed at the end of August -but made a derisory loan to purchase bid which turned the French side against him.
West Ham ended up signing Igor instead who has had about as much game-time – and influence – as James Ward Prowse under Nuno.
Teamtalk.com make it clear that West Ham’s fresh attempt to revisit the Cresswell recruitment saga is likely to end badly:
“West Ham could ABORT chase for leading centre-back target”
Runs their headline confirming that the Hammers either can’t afford or can’t schmooze the player away from his French side. Which is no surprise.
“West Ham United are still struggling to agree on the terms around Charlie Cresswell and are exploring other options, sources have told TEAMtalk.
Cresswell had been identified as a leading option to bring West Ham more solidity, but the conversations around getting the 23-year-old former Leeds United centre-back out of Toulouse are proving tricky.”
In other words, the player has more than likely turned the Hammers down flat.
Why on earth would Cresswell join the Premier league’s 18th side West Ham, (who are now an 89% odds on bet for relegation), relocate to England and then face another move in the summer when the Irons slide down into the Championship.
West Ham should have got the deal done in August. Quite possibly now, with Cresswell partnering Todibo in a new look West Ham defence, the Irons wouldn’t be in this predicament. Nice one, David.
If it’s about the fee Sullivan needs to pay up !
This saga is the ultimate inditement as to why Sullivan is not fit or knowledgeable enough to run a Sunday morning pub side let alone a Premiership club .
It’s not a new insight at all, it’s old information being trawled over again.
We need to move on and quickly as we need maybe two new CB’s.
The question needs to be asked why on earth we spent £20m on Pablo and haven’t used that for defensive players when you can bet your bottom dollar the bloke won’t play many games.
There hasn’t been an approach for Cresswell by West Ham end of. All the media stories are just that fairy tales. If there was ever a plan it was aborted long ago instead we are paying twice the market value to sign centre forwards. Taty isn’t a £29m player likewise Felipe who is at best a £9-10m signing.
Sullivan if the prices reported are what has been paid should be sacked for agreeing them and likewise Kilman.
I know we all give him a hard time but I don’t think Kilman is as bad as portrayed, like many before him he is a victim of a playing style that invites pressure.
Look at Man City earlier this season when Pep was experimenting with style trying to get ahead then defend a lead, every time they drew or lost.
If you give up momentum as Moyes and Nuno do then your defenders better be perfect and none are.
Aguerd was a very good player. Kilman is a good player not a great player but they are under pressure from minute 1 – 100 plus because of the low block.
The failure was the boards paying £40m for him, that’s not on him, in a team like City’s he would probably look like a world beater as opposed to ours where he can look like a panel beater.
Our best defender of the last 20 years was Ogbonna who rarely made mistakes.
Really a season or two in the Championship to evolve our style might be what the doctor ordered if we can get rid of this Board.
Agreed. Kilman would’ve been ok at £10m with a blood and guts CB beside him like he had at Wolves. If you talk to Wolves fans he didn’t cope well with the captaincy which suggests he doesn’t like the extra pressure and perhaps the £40m price tag hasn’t helped him.
Fact is his confidence is shot in a struggling side, and he’s making mistake after mistake so needs to be taken out of action for a while.
Sorry to say you are so wrong . Kilman is the root cause of a season and a half of awful defending. He is totally inadequate as a Prem player.
Agreed he’s inadequate in the here and now and needs to be dropped/sold.
But facts are facts, we over paid by at least £25-30m and you simply don’t get to play 200 games in the Prem without being half decent.
It’s the same old same old with WH we take half decent players and destroy their confidence rather than growing them.
Agree with Jimbo, and don’t disagree Cubby he has made mistakes but he has also been quite good at interceptions. He is imho a good player in a team with a different style and a different defensive partner. Put Dawson or Willy Boly alongside and when he makes mistakes the other bails him out. As it is we have a lot of similar players as CB options. Todibo has turned a corner and suddenly looks like our best defender. Though he is not a Dawson or commanding CB also have to factor in playing in front of Areola there is no communication if we had Fabianski in goal despite not being as good a shot stopper as Areola he is 10x the keeper. He organises the defence, is commanding on crosses and rarely makes bad choices. Despite being 40 when he was dropped he was statistically the best keeper in the Premier league, let that one settle in, Areola was ranked 21st statistically and it isn’t difficult to understand why.
Nice one David indeed. As for Kilman, we should change his name to Deadman. Because he certainly seems to be a dead man walking. He has no future at West Ham as he is largely responsible for West Ham having no future in the Premier League.