da marjack bet：
da gbg bet： Football is not a sport where people forget very easily. Once you are made into a laughing stock, there isn’t much you can do about it. It’s as though the world thinks people lack the capacity to change.Take any player who has failed at a big club – they seem unlikely to get another big move, mostly because the of the stigma attached. When Iago Aspas lined up for Spain against England, all Premier League followers could remember was a terrible corner he took for Liverpool against Manchester United. But it was his fine finish that set the game up for its own grandstand finish, as he inspired an experimental Spanish side to a late comeback at Wembley against England.The truth is, one bad spell doesn’t automatically make you a bad player or even a bad manager, but the question is whether or not it ends up taking its toll. For David Moyes, who starts his West Ham United tenure with a trip to Watford at the weekend, we’ll see whether three bad spells, at Manchester United, Real Sociedad and Sunderland, have sapped the confidence and belief from a man who was once regarded as one of English football’s most competent managers.Perhaps the early giggles about the appointment of David Moyes at the east London club are dissipating, however, as West Ham fans understand that, whether or not they’re happy with the identity of their new manager, their team still needs their support. Whilst it’s obviously an unscientific show of hands from a small sample of people, a Twitter poll from West Ham site West Ham World this week could be instructive.
Just because the new manager is given the courtesy of an open mind, though, doesn’t mean that the tide isn’t actually turning. Whilst it’s clear that Moyes wasn’t a popular choice in the first place, it doesn’t mean to say that he won’t become one after time. What will change minds is results and positive football, something that happened in Slaven Bilic’s first season, but has been sorely lacking from the London Stadium so far this season.
Some of that has been down to the former manager, but some of the problems the club have suffered in the last year and a bit have come from other factors, one of them being the club’s hierarchy. David Gold and David Sullivan have become something of an easy target over the last few months because of how vocal they – and those around them – can be on social media, and because of the players they’ve brought into the club over the last few seasons. But there’s one criticism that can’t be laid at their door: that they’re unafraid to change direction. And praise should be given where it is due.
The summer before last was characterised by a scatter gun approach to player recruitment and resulted in a dismal first season in the new ground as well as an early exit from Europe. The next year it was different: it remains to be seen whether or not the signings made before the start of the current season were the right ones, but it’s undeniable that there was a marked change in approach, and that’s to be praised somewhat. They have, at the very least, identified a problem and tried to act on it.
The same thing is true of the change in manager. West Ham’s owners have been known to let a manager’s contract run down before parting ways by simply not renewing. This time, instead of doing the same thing with Slaven Bilic, they acted and changed the manager halfway through the season. It might well be true that it should have happened sooner, but this is the first time a West Ham manager has been sacked before May in over a decade, when Alan Pardew was given his marching orders by Eggert Magnusson.
What they’ve replaced him with is also a change of tack from the Bilic route, and perhaps that’s the most significant change made by the hierarchy this season.
Bilic, it has become clear, was not a hands-on coach. His methods have been questioned, and while they may not necessarily bad, some approaches work better in different contexts. After two years of the Croatian, Hammers players were, clearly, becoming disillusioned with what was going on. Bilic’s attempts to treat the players like adults really only succeeded in unravelling the discipline within the squad. It also seems as though he trusted his players too much, neglecting to work technically or tactically on the training pitch in favour of essentially hoping a group of professional footballers could work things out for themselves on the pitch.
That’s not necessarily a bad approach for some groups of players. But it simply didn’t work in this context: clearly West Ham players needed something different. And in David Moyes, they’ll get the opposite type of manager, one who arguably over-coaches players and micromanages to a much greater degree. That will surely help the players in the short term, but even that approach may not be of long-term benefit.
The question is of whether or not David Moyes is damaged goods after his three recent failures, but in theory his style of management seems to fit the owners’ recent trend of 180 degree turns. There can be no doubting that the West Ham board have changed tack again, but for it to succeed this time, they’ll need to hope that Moyes, too, can get over his own failures.