web analytics

The Henry Affair – he said “we” not “he”

The West Ham racism row rumbles on with Tony Henry at the centre of it as the FA steps in with a demand to see e mails at the heart of the affair.

That’s not good news for anybody at the club when the text of Henry’s electronic correspondence is studied word by word.

For the director to the board responsible  the board claims that “we” not “he” “don’t want any more Africans.”

As a result any inquiry into what went on needs to ask the question of Henry: “Who are you referring to when you talk about “we.”

Henry is currently suspended from duty but given his use of the collective word “we” many questions need answering before we have closure.

Here are  the key words from the e mail which we believe was addressed to another agent trying to put a player into the club:

‘We don’t want any more Africans and he’s not good enough. I sent Thomas to watch him and the other lad last week and he said no. If Palace take them good luck.’

Henry then confirmed it was true and suggested it was a policy supported by club management. ‘Yeah,’ Henry replied. ‘Because we had three and we felt we didn’t particularly want any more African players.’

In one CandH story we inadvertently used the word “he” as in Tony Henry which was incorrect and we apologise to him and readers for misquoting  the e-mail.

The  word “we” is far more embracing and suggests this story could run and run.

Click Here for Comments >

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

3 comments on “The Henry Affair – he said “we” not “he”

  1. It obviously come from Sullivan, it doesn’t take the brains of Britain to work that one out. Hopefully he is found out and action is taken against him, can’t stand the bloke. At first I constantly stood up for him but looking back at it everyone else was right and I was wrong the sooner he is out of this club the better.

  2. I think it is ok to say we don’t want more African players because of the problem caused by them going to the ACN, but there doesn’t seem to be any mention of that. Also in my opinion some of the people who have been hounded for statements made in private which have been leaked from emails or texts have been badly treated e.g. Allardyce for his views on Hodgson & the royals. But if (IF) if it is describing an agreed recruitment policy based on the view that African players are trouble when not picked then yes it is going to run & run. And probably not end well. Definitely not for Henry but maybe the buck won’t stop with him.

  3. Hugh, fair play to you for replying comprehensively to the point I made and publishing this clarification and correction. Thank you.

    There is an implication, and it’s only an implication at this stage, that this was a policy decision made by more than Tony Henry. If people more senior than him were involved in any way then they need to be identified and asked for an explanation, with the obvious sanction set by the precedent of Tony Henry’s termination.

    As you say, there are many questions that need to be answered and we deserve full transparency. None of us decent fans wish to be associated with anyone implementing a racist policy at our club and no one should be allowed to hide behind this sacking if they were also part of the decision making.

Comments are closed.