Another Samuels dig

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

The fact they look at you a little puzzled proves we are no longer a big club.

What you then say (I do) is that we are below the PL, which very few people outside the UK have ever heard of.
My experience is that either foreigners are well clued up on English football, in which case they've heard of us, or they only immediately recognise about half a dozen club names, i.e. those that regularly play in the CL, in which case they haven't a clue who we are.
And "no longer a big club" does not equate to us being a small club.
My question still remains, does anyone defending his comment actually say to someone who doesn't know us, "we are a small English club"?
 

Honours board:

West Ham United:
0 top flight titles (best ever finish 3rd in 1985/86)
2 second division titles (1957/58, 1980/81)
3 FA cups (1964, 1975, 1980)
61/92 seasons in the top flight

Sheffield United
1 top flight title (1897/98)
1 second division title (1952/53)
4 FA cups (1899, 1902, 1915, 1925)
60/114 seasons in the top flight

West Ham United's fame is the emperor's new clothes. Sheffield United and West Ham United are pretty evenly matched; if anything history would suggest that [Sheffield] United is the bigger team as we have more honours. Our recent records are the only difference: they're a top flight club and we're not.

It's a sly dig from someone who should know better and it comes across as petty. If we were to get promoted this season we'd be in the middle strata of clubs in the Premier League when viewed by size: bigger than Bournemouth, Watford, Fulham, Brighton, Southampton, Cardiff & Palace.
i like a good conspiracy but i can’t see this one sorry
 
The fact they look at you a little puzzled proves we are no longer a big club.

What you then say (I do) is that we are below the PL, which very few people outside the UK have ever heard of.
not so sure.. in europe i often get asked where i’m from.. sheffield
i’d say 6/10 times they come back with united 3/10 pigs and the odd one ‘oldest club in the world’;)
 
It's typical Martin Samuels but it isn't the worst thing he has said about us.

He does seem a bit obsessed with us, maybe he doesn't like the emoji we have of him on this forum. :)

:fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat:
 
Anyone taking offence at that article needs their head testing. As they should for reading the Mail

In those early years of the Premier League United were a 'small' club...often under transfer embargo, never had money for players, often signing them from lower leagues (or when the manager re-mortgaged his house), attendances generally lower to what we get now..back then we were 'small' and were ran appallingly. Bassett and his staff worked miracles at the club to get four years in the top flight under those circumstances.

Samuels is low rate, he works for the Mail for gods sake, hes no Henry Winter or Daniel Taylor, why people a) read him and b) get wound up is beyond me.
I remember when we were trying to sign Glynn Hodges, the club were forced into selling raffle tickets to raise funds. I remember selling them to my sixth form mates who were Sunderland, Boro and Mags (I lived in Northallerton) and they thought it was a piss-take!
 
Put a sock in it will you. Its the same comment on every single sports article posted on here from The Mail Online.

There might be a reason for that. Perhaps ask yourself why?

It's a nasty little shitrag of a paper offering its own biased bile in place of reasoned journalism. Immigrants, gypsies, dole scroungers are to blame, usually for trying to steal babies from decent Home Counties taxpayers.

At least the Sun doesn't pretend to be a proper paper.
 
It's typical Martin Samuels but it isn't the worst thing he has said about us.

He does seem a bit obsessed with us, maybe he doesn't like the emoji we have of him on this forum. :)

:fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat:
Makes him look better than the slob he is. Jowls and gut not big enough.
 
Sheffield United and West Ham United are pretty evenly matched; if anything history would suggest that [Sheffield] United is the bigger team as we have more honours.

You're deluding yourself.

West Ham have never even played below the second tier and are light years ahead of us financially.
 
The big club / small club is the most tedious argument going. United arent a 'big' club and arent as big as West Ham, that's plainly obvious. We've won 5 things of note in 130 years, none since 1925. We have a good fan base. we go through the leagues regularly, but on average 30th out of 92 is us. Thats it. For us its obviously the best club in the world, but in the grand scheme of things we cannot be called a 'big' club. But who really cares?? It means nothing. Support your team, hate Wednesday, have a laugh.
 
The big club / small club is the most tedious argument going. United arent a 'big' club and arent as big as West Ham, that's plainly obvious. We've won 5 things of note in 130 years, none since 1925. We have a good fan base. we go through the leagues regularly, but on average 30th out of 92 is us. Thats it. For us its obviously the best club in the world, but in the grand scheme of things we cannot be called a 'big' club. But who really cares?? It means nothing. Support your team, hate Wednesday, have a laugh.
It's not about whether we're a big club. It's about whether we're a small club. Are you saying you think we are a small club? That's what Samuel said.
 
The big club / small club is the most tedious argument going. United arent a 'big' club and arent as big as West Ham, that's plainly obvious. We've won 5 things of note in 130 years, none since 1925. We have a good fan base. we go through the leagues regularly, but on average 30th out of 92 is us. Thats it. For us its obviously the best club in the world, but in the grand scheme of things we cannot be called a 'big' club. But who really cares?? It means nothing. Support your team, hate Wednesday, have a laugh.
Strong smell of pork. Isn't this the area The Pitsmoor Pillock has gone to live? Coincidence?
 
Makes him look better than the slob he is. Jowls and gut not big enough.
samuel_and_parkinson.jpg


No wonder he can't get a girlfriend
 

It's not about whether we're a big club. It's about whether we're a small club. Are you saying you think we are a small club? That's what Samuel said.
In context of his article, and the time period he is talking about, and for the reasons me and others have said yes we were a 'small' club in that league at that time. We came from Div 3 where crowds were 8/9k at the start of the season, got consecutive promotions and in our first season fans had chip in to buy Hodges who played a major part in us staying up. We were a 'bigger' club than the likes of chesterfield, Rotherham and about 60 odd other clubs at that time too. So yes, in the context of what he was talking about and the league we were in, we were a 'small' club. But really, does it actually matter?? Grab a beer and enjoy the match later
 
You're deluding yourself.

West Ham have never even played below the second tier and are light years ahead of us financially.

Of course they're light years ahead of us financially. They've been effectively gifted a 57,000 capacity stadium while netting £100m+ selling their old ground for redevelopment. Then they're grossing £100m per season in TV rights (we'll be lucky to get 8% of that).

Their last 60 years offsets our 60 years before that. At the moment they're bigger (you'll note I didn't include them in the list of sides I'd consider us to be at least equal to) but historically, the two sides are evenly matched.

You're also deluding yourself if you really think we're a small club. We're in a strata below the elite which covers the bottom 75% of the premier league and 50% of the Championship. Yes, currently we're lower in that strata than West Ham but we are in that same strata nonetheless.
 
Of course they're light years ahead of us financially. They've been effectively gifted a 57,000 capacity stadium while netting £100m+ selling their old ground for redevelopment. Then they're grossing £100m per season in TV rights (we'll be lucky to get 8% of that).

Their last 60 years offsets our 60 years before that. At the moment they're bigger (you'll note I didn't include them in the list of sides I'd consider us to be at least equal to) but historically, the two sides are evenly matched.

You're also deluding yourself if you really think we're a small club. We're in a strata below the elite which covers the bottom 75% of the premier league and 50% of the Championship. Yes, currently we're lower in that strata than West Ham but we are in that same strata nonetheless.

Good and considered observations BB.

Overall the difference, however you choose to describe this, is down to money acquired from being part of the TV revolution that football has enjoyed. West Ham, although not what you'd describe as one of the biggest clubs in England, have had the good fortune to remain as a Prem club. They're not particularly successful, but they are entitled to many millions due to their Prem membership, and that will attract the likes of their current owners, or come to that any other predatory owner.

Finger's crossed, our day will come in the not too distant future. But for now, to reflect your own description, we're some way apart from the likes of the cockney toerags.
 
Good and considered observations BB.

Overall the difference, however you choose to describe this, is down to money acquired from being part of the TV revolution that football has enjoyed. West Ham, although not what you'd describe as one of the biggest clubs in England, have had the good fortune to remain as a Prem club. They're not particularly successful, but they are entitled to many millions due to their Prem membership, and that will attract the likes of their current owners, or come to that any other predatory owner.

Finger's crossed, our day will come in the not too distant future. But for now, to reflect your own description, we're some way apart from the likes of the cockney toerags.
And finger's crossed the Spammers will one day drop out of the League.
 
It's typical Martin Samuels but it isn't the worst thing he has said about us.

He does seem a bit obsessed with us, maybe he doesn't like the emoji we have of him on this forum. :)

:fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat::fattwat:

Feel free to copy & paste:

samuel.gif

And finger's crossed the Spammers will one day drop out of the League.

No chance. It wouldn't be fair on their fans.
 
I'm not one of these who thinks every man and their dog has an agenda against us but he does. There is no reason why he would have chosen us as one of his examples as a small club when Bassett has also managed Palace in the top flight. He also managed Leicester who at the time were very much a small club based on the arguments in this thread too. They were admin at the time they went up.

He just likes shoe horning us into his articles because he's doesn't like that we made a show of West Ham. I don't think United are bigger than West Ham. I don't think United are a big club. I do think Martin Samuel is incredibly bitter that the club he supports were eventually outed as cheats though.
 

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

All advertisments are hidden for logged in members, why not log in/register?

Back
Top Bottom