Wednesday, May 9

Ayew sale doesn't look so bad now

Selling Andre Ayew to Swansea is now looking like a master-stroke. When Ayew had a fantastic game against West Ham to inspire a 4-1 win back in March it looked like Swansea were heading to safety and West Ham had made a big mistake in selling to a relegation rival. But Ayew has failed to score for the Swans since his return and the side is winless for eight games since beating the Hammers. Last night's home defeat to Southampton means relegation looks a near certainty. 

Ayew was overpriced when West Ham signed him for £20 million. He was a decent PL performer who could cross and score the odd goal, but to my mind he was a £10 million player at best. For £20 million you expect a quality specialist in either midfield or attack. No-one ever seemed sure what Ayew's best position was. So getting the club's money back when he returned to Swansea for £20 million was decent business. Although the money should have been spent on signing a quality forward rather than the untested £8m Jordan Hugill, but this is West Ham after all. 

6 comments:

Unknown said...

Recalling all the fools who were slating Moyse and the board for selling him, there should be a lot of humble pie around now. Apart from one wonder goal and a couple of tap-ins he did nothing for us apart from strolling around pointing where others should run - the sale always was a great deal.

Pete May said...

It was a great goal at Palace but we just didn't see enough of that. And with Arnie, Carroll, Hernandez and Antonio at the club Moyes wasn't short of strikers. Selling Fonte was stranger as we had ti ely on a 19-year-old at the back when Reid got injured.

mj said...

Talking of buying and selling - can we give Moyes a year? I'm weary of constant changes - managers/ back room etc...

Pete May said...

I think we need some continuity too. There are reservations about Moyes but he's done what he was hired for and might be more attacking with a better squad next season

matt said...

Generous assessment of West Ham's transfer business there. Moaners might say this master-stroke involved spending a then club record £20.5 million on a player we could have had free the season before (money that could have been spent on a better player); then got £18 million back (the other £2 million is add-ons we won't get after Swansea's relegation) and spent half on of it on a player the manager didn't seem to want and never uses. But who could complain about the Board's achievements over the past few seasons?

Pete May said...

Agree we should never have bought him Matt! Sort of thing a Director of Football might prevent