Back to the future move as David Moyes replaces Manuel Pellegrini as West Ham manager

So it's rewind time at West Ham, with the return of David Moyes as manager, the man less anyone forget, passed over by the board 18 months ago to make way for Manuel Pellegrini.

Defeat at home to Leicester City proved the final straw for West Ham's owners, who summarily dismissed Pellegrini after this latest setback.

It has be a turbulent reign for the Chilean since he took over the manager’s job from David Moyes  back in the summer of 2018.

Pellegrini made an instant impact, bringing in nine new players, including Felipe Anderson, Andriy Yarmolenko, Lukasz Fabianski, Issa Diop and Jack Wilshere.

These signings proved a series of hits and misses. Club record signing Anderson was a big hit unplayable at times, thrilling the fans with his mazey runs and scoring a collections of memorable goals. Fabianski was probably the bargain (£7m), a brilliant keeper, who saved the team many points last year.

Diop forged a formidable centre back parternship with Fabian Balbuena, then Angelo Ogbonna. Others were less successful. Jack Wilshere was signed on a three year contract, reported to be around £100k a week but has played only a handful of games. Yarmolenko was out for most of last season before returning with early promise this term but then again faded from the scene.

Pellegrini brought on some young players, with Declan Rice sparkling under his tutelage. Grady Diangana also made a big impact, troubling defences and scoring goals – a number of fans remain baffled as to why he was loaned to West Brom for the season – where he has prospered.

Pellegrini began his time at West Ham badly losing his first four games, before turning the corner last season. The team finished well, securing 10th, though it could so easily have been 7th or 8th. Everyone at the club was optimistic for the new season.

There were new signings Sebastian Haller (£43m) and Pablo Fornals (£22m) plus the return of Yarmolenko and a rejuvenated Michail Antonio.

Things began well, with the club in and around the top four come the end of September. Then it all seemed to go wrong. The 0-4 :Caraboa Cup defeat at League II Oxford United seemed pivotal, referred to by Pellegrini as the time when things began to go wrong.

 

Three days after that game talismanic keeper Fabianski was injured playing against Bournemouth– out for three months. What made matters worse was that his deputy Roberto proved to be a disaster, repeatedly making errors and costing points in the Premier League. It was not until Roberto was replaced by David Martin (son of club legend Alvin) that things began to look up with a victory at Chelsea. Another away win at Southampton showed promise but still the defeats kept coming at home.

The collapse in confidence is difficult to fathom. A team that was briskly passing the ball, going through sides, now looked impotent. The confidence of early season visibly drained from the players.

A number of the players just did not look bothered. The confident Haller, who scored four early goals looked a shadow of his former self, slow and uninterested. In what proved the penultimate game against Crystal Palace, there was a big fall out on the pitch between captain Mark Noble and veteran defender Angelo Ogbonna.

The manager made some very odd selections, sticking with Roberto when it seemed only he could see the value of the player. Repeatedly subsituting Anderson early, when he was often the most potent force on the pitch.

His signings have been a series of hits and misses. Letting keeper Adrian go to Liverpool, whilst replacing him with the error prone Roberto was probably the most costly mistake.

Critics also point to Pellegrini’s love of creative players – the signing of the likes of Wilshere, Fornals and Anderson, but failing to strengthen weak areas such as at full backs and holding midfield.

Moyes should do the job. The team are not in the relegation area yet, just sliding towards it. Moyes will get the players fitter, with a very definite idea of how he wants them to play. If they don’t do what the manager wants, they will be out. Not always the most attractive team under Moyes, they will pick up the points needed to stay in the Premier League.

The failure of Pellegrini will be a big blow to the board, who brought in a big name, who they hoped would take the club to the next level. It has not worked out, with the club now lumbered with 18 months to pay out on an £8 m a year contract.

A move to Moyes will for many fans will seem like back to the future: consolidation and safety, rather than going to the next level. The arrival of Mauricio Pochettino or Rafa Benitez would testify that the light of ambition is still burning bright at West Ham.

Despite the recent form, there is though plenty to be optimistic about. The squad is good,with some exciting players. There is huge potential to bring young players through 

It is now time to regroup at West Ham, before plotting the way forward – there is much that needs to be done at a club that despite its size continues to under deliver for its fans.

David Moyes set to return as West Ham manager, after Manuel Pellegrini is sacked following latest defeat against Leicester

This proved to be the final lacklustre performance from Manuel Pellegrini's struggling Hammers, with the manager sacked after this latest defeat against Leicester City.

The decision does not come as a surprise, with the Chilean really losing his way over recent months, following such a promising start to the season.

The confusion surrounding the team was apparent from the opening team selection, with the two outstanding performers, over recent weeks, Michail Antonio and Robert Snodgrass, among seven changes from the team that lost to Palace on Boxing day. 

A substitution merry go round then ensued, with the two players coming on in the second half, when Leicester were already 2-1ahead.

The crowds growing displeasure, saw the substitution of Mark Noble replacement Carlos Sanchez get the biggest cheer of the afternoon.

Pellegrini later explained that Noble was not able to play two games in 48 hours.

Leicester manager Brendan Rodgers made nine changes from the team that lost 0-4 to Liverpool. "The result was a testament to the players and the work we've done in the 10 months," said Rodgers. "We needed the energy and attitude, so i'm pleased for them."

The home team were in trouble as early as the ninth minutes when returning keeper Lukasz Fabianski upended the onrushing Kelechi Iheanacho. The keeper then redeemed himself saving the resulting penalty.

West Ham then forced a couple of saves out of Leicester keeper Kasper Schmeichel, the first a rasping shot from Arthur Masuaka, the second a weak effort into the ground from Declan Rice.

Leicester took the lead 5 minutes before half time, West Ham failing to clear a cross that was then put back in for Ayoze Perez to head back for Iheanacho to head home.

Four minutes later Felipe Anderson made a driving run forward, exchanging passes with Ryan Fredericks, before crossing back for Pablo Fornals to sweep home his first goal in claret and blue.

Leicester took the lead 10 minutes into the second half, Perez threading a defence splitting ball through, which Gray finished with ease.

West Ham huffed and puffed but there was no coming back.

Pellegrini declared: "The players are under pressure, the team want to do it but they don't know how to do it."

Speculation now begins on who will take up the managerial position, with David Moyes being hotly tipped, though he is believed to want a longer deal not just a stop gap to the end of the season such as he was given in 2017.

Who needs £1 billion to live on?

The Christmas period is a time for celebration as well as reflection on the state of the world.

It is a time for charity and generosity, when we all come together to share and reach out to those less well off than ourselves. And yet we live in an incredibly unequal world.

In the UK, some 20% of the population live in poverty – 8 million working adults, 4 million children and 1.9 million pensioners.

A recent social media posting declared that if all the billionaires in the world were reduced to having just £1 billion to get by on, then the wealth released could solve most of humanities problems.

The problems that could be resolved included climate change, world poverty and homelessness. 

This revelation really does get you thinking. First, why does any one person need more than £1 billion to live on. Most people could and do survive on so much less.

The present wealth division seems to be created on the basis of the need for a small number of super rich people to prosper at the cost of everyone else. If everyone had sufficient, then the possibility for a few to exploit the many would not exist.

The whole thing is absurd. Yet, at the recent election people seem to have voted for this absurdity to continue. 

One amusing social media post referred to how in France, the government was seeking to put the retirement age up to 62 – the response – people run to the barricades in protest. In Britain, politicians say the retirement age needs to go up to 75 because otherwise those earning more than £80,000 will have to pay a bit more tax – the response –  vote for them. (I would add that the extension of the retirement age was not in any of the manifestos in the UK election).

The very rich continue to get richer, while the mass of people get poorer. In a country of more than 150 billionaires, how can it be right that more than one million go to foodbanks.  Homeless levels grow and children co hungry. It is an inequality that cannot sustain.

The Labour Party manifesto offered a programme to address this inequality - it was rejected out of hand. Instead, we move ahead with a Brexit deal guaranteed to make the poor poorer. A world where foodbanks multiply in the fifth richest economy in the world.

The present unequal and unjust system is creaking - the only answer is for a proper redistribution from the few to the many - failure to take such action will have serious repercussions for rich and poor alike.

published in Wanstead & Woodford Guardian - 27/12/2019

Irrational man

The ongoing failure to tackle the cause of the climate crisis, rather than the symptoms, is going to cost us all dear.

Back in 2006, in a report for the British government, Sir Nicholas Stern warned that failure to act would be very costly in the long term. Better to bite the bullet and really address the climate problem then.

Needless to say, Sir Nicholas’s words were ignored. Now, the cost is beginning to grow – rising sea levels, increased floods and droughts are all among the symptoms to be dealt with – and that’s without even mentioning the repercussions of going beyond the climate tipping point, where interrelated chain reactions kick in.

The human being is supposed to be a rational creature, so why does it not respond to the evidence and seriously act to address this crisis, rather than simply addressing the symptoms as they arise?

Letter published in the Independent - 23/12/2019

Time to join the tree planting revolution

Planting more trees across the UK has become a growing demand as more and more people call for serious steps to be taken to address climate change.

Trees absorb the damaging  carbon dioxide, have a cooling effect, reduce flooding risk, cut pollution and increase biodiversity – providing habitats for birds, mammals and insects among others.

Woods also ofcourse have many beneficial qualities for human beings beyond absorbing CO2, including improving mental and physical health.

Just 13% of the UK is covered by trees, which compares to an EU average of 37%, so there is some way to go.

Friends of the Earth has called for a doubling of tree cover in the UK by 2045, as part of its Climate Action Plan. It is predicted this would remove some 50 million tonnes of CO2 from the atmosphere – some 10% of what is currently produced.

There is certainly much public demand in this area to see more trees planted. Redbridge Council has already made some positive moves, such as the planting of 1000s of trees in Hainault and other parts of the borough. Plans are being worked on now, as to how the tree planting operation can progress, including to the Wanstead area.

Elsewhere Hackney Council has committed to increase its tree canopy cover to 50% by 2022 and 100% by 2024. Many councils have committed to the doubling of tree cover.

Doubling tree cover will ofcourse be a relative thing, depending on how many trees a borough already has in place.

What is important for councils is to ingrain positive climate measures in every aspect of policy. So there needs to be thought going into how green space, including trees, can be included in new developments. And developers must deliver on these commitments.

The idea of green and brownfield areas is also becoming outdated, with the whole land mass now being viewed in terms of sustainable living.

Locally, Cleaner Greener Wanstead recently gave away 200 young sapplings for planting. There are a number of schemes around that people can access to fund tree planting or obtain the trees themselves.

The Woodland Trust has been at the forefront of the tree planting revolution, with its recent TV appeal with naturalist Chris Packham to raise £150,000 to fund 100,000 tree packs, proving successful.

One of the problems in the UK relating to planting more trees is that the land is predominantly privately owned. This means providing motivations and incentives for private citizens to join the tree planting revolution.

This though should not be an insurmountable problem given a growing willingness to plant trees. There maybe some problems in the long term due to shortage of land and also a clash with other priorities such as agricultural production.

In Wanstead, the City of London Corporation own much of the open land – they will no doubt be looking at ways to plant more trees – in areas that are often already well supplied.

Open spaces like golf courses also offer an opportunity to plant trees discreetly around the area.

 So there is much more we can all be doing to increase tree cover in the local area as part of the climate fightback – let’s make sure it happens.

Why not do something for trees at Christmas - plant your own or gift membership of organisations like Friends of the Earth and the Woodland Trust?

Links of the Duke of Wellington to the East India Company and Wanstead House

There were close links over the years between Wanstead House, the infamous East India Company and the family of the Duke of Wellington.

Wanstead House was built by in 1722 on the proceeds of East India Company (EIA) money.

The house was built by Sir Richard Childs, who inherited his fortune from father Sir Josiah Childs, who had been a governor of the EIA .

The house was eventually inherited by Catherine Tylney-Long at the time (the late 18^th century) she was the richest woman in England with an annual income of £80,000.

The tragic story of Catherine saw her turn down the possibility of marrying the future King William IV in favour of William Wellesley Pole – the nephew of the Duke of Wellington.

Catherine made a terrible choice when she married William in 1812. He cheated and abused her, squandered her fortune and finished by selling the house off in bits.

The house was on a level with Blenheim Palace, so had it survived the whole development of this part of London would have been very different. The fascinating story of William and Catherine is told in the excellent Angel and the Cad by Geraldine Roberts.

The activities of  the East India Company have risen to prominence over recent years, with the TV dramatisation, Taboo, starring Tom Hardy (part of which was filmed at St Marys Church) and Beecham House. But now William Dalrymple has produced a brilliant book, the Anarchy, looking at the bloody rise of the East India Company – the first big multinational that became too big to fail.

The EIC started life as a trading company in 1599. The Company struggled to get “a foothold in India and the region.” This though all changed in the mid-18^th century, with the EIC effectively transforming from being a trading company to an aggressive military combatant in the region. By 1750, the Company had a 200,000 strong standing army.

Dalrymple nicely summarises the transformation of the EIC over the 35 years to 1798,  “from a trading company to a privately owned imperial power with a standing army and territorial possession far larger than that of its parent country.”

 

The out of control nature of the Company, which was run by a group of directors from Leadenhall Street in the City of London, was revealed in the 1770s when it hit difficulties. At the time the Company accounted for half of all British trade – it amounted to a channel to transport Indian wealth into the pockets of the English elite.

 

The joint stock nature of the Company structure meant that many in the elite of society – including a large number of politicians – were heavily invested in the enterprise. So when it hit trouble, the EIC was regarded as too large to fail.

 

The 1770s crisis also marked the point when Parliament would come to regulate and control more and more of the Companies activities. A major regulatory role was the price exacted for a huge £1.4 million loan extended to the Company by Parliament in 1773.

 

While operating as what amounted to a corporate mercenary the Company managed to take over running most of India - defeating the previous Mughal Empire rulers, then other pretenders such as the Nawabs, the Marathas and Rohillas.

 

Key players over the years were Robert Clive, a bold brutal British adventurer, who really established the military vice that was to extend out across India. Then power was consolidated under the likes of governor generals Warren Hastings, Philip Francis, George Cornwallis and latterly the Richard and Arthur Wellesley (the Duke of Wellington).

 

The Wellesleys finished off the effort of the Company to take over most parts of plunderable India, whilst also moving the enterprise ever more closely under the control of the British State. It took though until 1857 before the Company was effectively no more, with India passing under the total control of the British Empire.

 

The Wellesleys  also played a key role in bringing to an end the legacy of the EIA in Wanstead, given it was their relation William Wellesley Pole who oversaw the demise of Wanstead House.

 

The great strength of Anarchy is in revealing the truly brutal and aggressive nature of those pursuing the early stages of creating the rudiments of what was to become the British Empire. Dalrymple does a great service to history with this work that reveals the reality of what really went on, rather than the shiny image often presented in British history books of empire as some sort of civilising force for humanity

Manuel Pellegrini left hanging onto his job after another dismal display from West Ham

West Ham 1-3 Arsenal

West Ham manager Manuel Pellegrini must be holding on to his job by a thread after this comprehensive collapse in front of an increasingly exasperated home support at the London Stadium.

The growing anger of the fans was evidenced by a more than half empty stadium by the final whistle. The boos rang out from those who were left, as they had done earlier when Filipe Anderson, arguably West Ham’s most threatening attacker on the night, was substituted.

Pellegrini felt his team competed well for the first hour but then it all went wrong. “We needed to try to score the second goal,” said Pellegrini, who seems well aware of his team’s inconsistencies. “We need to see more like the performance against Chelsea and for 60 minutes of this game.”

The manager listed a number of weaknesses, such as not concentrating in defence, conceding easy goals and lack of confidence. What a difference a couple of months makes, then West Ham were flying high in the top four of the Premiership.

Since then things have gone from bad to worse. The decision to continue with goalkeeper Roberto for so many games before bringing in the much more able David Martin is looking like a monumental error.

But there are other real problems at West Ham, which were so evident in this performance. Arsenal were very poor for the first hour, continually giving the ball away and failing to mount any serious attack.

West Ham came alive just before half time, Angelo Ogbonna coming through a group of players to head home a Robert Snodgrass cross. There were then efforts from Snodgrass and Declan Rice, which failed to find the net.

Everything, though, changed on the hour, when Arsenal broke down the left. A cross found Gabriel Martinelli who, alone on the edge of the six yard area, slotted home.

Five minutes later the ball was worked across the area, before Nicolas Pepe drove home.

Then Pepe turned provider, sending over a cross that Pierre-Emerick Aubameyang finished with ease.

A complete capitulation in less than 10 minutes, having been in almost total charge for the preceding hour.

Acting Arsenal manager Freddie Ljungberg was happy with the win, though not the lethargy shown by his team in the first half.

Ljunberg felt his players felt the pressure that had built up over recent weeks. “In the last 30 minutes the pressure lifted and we played,” said Ljunberg.

 

 

Loss of a prophetic voice - Michael Brownlee

The power of one – that was the mantra of my friend Michael, who has just died.

Michael was someone who saw early the devastation likely to be caused by climate change. We had numerous conversations, often over a couple of whiskies, about what was likely to happen.

These conversations began in the early part of the noughties. We were both keen to be as self-sufficiency as possible. We talked about getting 20 acres, animals, crop rotations but in the end settled for a more modest vision in Wanstead.

This amounted to growing as much as possible of our own food. Initially, Aileen (Michael’s wife) and myself developed a patch in their garden. Potatoes and tomatoes were among the early crops. Later, Michael, took a more hands on role ( he never did stop those potatoes coming back). I got an allotment in Redbridge Lane West growing veg there and in my garden.

Michael developed his back garden plot, installing several raised beds and a magnificent greenhouse, where he got the seedlings going. He also majored on tomatoes, growing a whole number of different varieties. Michael loved his time in the garden – it was a passion he wished he had discovered earlier in life. He enjoyed clearing the weeds in a methodical way – something I could never understand.

The fruits of the garden labour were used in all sorts of different dishes developed in the Brownlee kitchen. Michael used to make some fantastic soups, which if you were lucky enough to be passing, went down beautifully with a bit of his home made bread.

Beyond growing your own, Michael and Aileen did their best to cut emissions. Photovoltaic and solar panels were put on the roof of their house. Insulation was fitted.

Michael was pretty hardcore in being a witness for action against global warming. He gave up flying and driving.

He had seen the future, if humanity continued down its ruinous track. There was a need for a real retrenchment, a look at how we lived, maybe a step back to look at things, how they used to be – simpler times, when less of the planets resources were being quite as voraciously destroyed.

So Michael and Aileen very much walked the walk as well as talking the talk on how to counter the climate destruction. It was somewhat alarming that what we had seen and predicted all those years ago has over recent years come down the tracks much more rapidly than ever foreseen at that time.

Now, sadly Michael has left us. I’ll miss his wise words as well as those, at times, rancorous debates. He had an immense thirst for knowledge, which he would then pass on to others. He provided ongoing tips about how to live a more sustainable, less destructive life. A relatively recent piece of advice related to not using tea bags because of the plastic contained in them.

Michael also debated on social media with those who often opposed any idea of living more sustainably. At times it was frustrating but no doubt he helped change a few minds.

He will be much missed by all those who knew and loved him. He had wise words, passion and genuine kindness for all around him – a real eco-warrior, who it has been a pleasure to call a friend over many years.

RIP Michael

Ken Loach's film Sorry we missed you demonstrates the insecurity of the gig economy but the fightback is underway

The release of Ken Loach’s film “Sorry we missed you” has stirred quite a debate on the nature of employment in the 21^st century.

It focuses on the gig economy, viewed from the experience of one family. The insecurity of zero hours contracts, endless hours of work, pressures on family life and finally everyone being pushed to breaking point.

In classic Loach style, it reveals a whole variety of social problems through a narrative centred on the life of one working family.

What the film helps to reveal is how the terrain of work has changed over the years. Long gone are the jobs for life. People on secure contracts, guaranteed pay, holidays, sick pay and pensions – the secure base that enabled people to live their lives with less worries and stress.

Over recent decades, there has been the arrival of short term insecure contracts. No security, with pay levels so low that people have to do more than one job just to survive.

This low pay economy has been underwritten by things like the tax credit system, which enables employers to pay low rates, knowing the state will make up the difference with benefits.

The gig economy is essentially about shifting all the responsibilities of the employer onto the employee. So delivery drivers, care workers, security guards and a myriad of other professions are all viewed  as being "self-employed."

They are usually working for the one employer but that employer off-loads all those other previously accepted areas of responsibility.

The damage that the casualisation of work does to families was evident a few years ago when the living wage campaign was launched. It came about originally via a community organising group called London Citizens (which later became Citizens UK).

Its members were drawn from faith and community organisations in London. The members were asked what problems caused the most difficulties in their lives. The feedback was the low paid work that was forcing people to do two or three jobs just to try to keep their families afloat. This was having terrible effects on individual and family lives.

The campaign sought to get a decent living wage. Big banks like HSBC and Barclays were approached. The organisation managed to bring together people from all levels of society. On one occasion, I  remember sitting in a church hall in the east end of London with a variety of community representatives together with the chairman of HSBC and the Catholic Bishop of Brentwood. There were other more disruptive actions, such as banking all the copper coin from Church collections at a bank branch in Oxford Street.

The Mayor of London at the time, Ken Livingstone, was also approached. He responded favourably, engaging with the idea and setting up a living wage unit at City hall. The living wage rate was then set yearly for those employed by GLA staff and importantly for companies providing services. When Boris Johnson became Mayor he continued to raise the living wage level. Successive mayors have proved real champions for the idea.

The living wage campaign proved to be a great success. The concept has now been accepted nationally by all parties and is actively promoted. It has done much to improve the living conditions of many in society. So a real success story and sign of what can be done, when the will is there. There is though still much to do.

Zero hour contracts have been criticised by the trade unions, the TUC and many others. They play a role in destroying security for working people. There is no certainty in a zero hours contract. There can be a long day of back to back jobs or an empty day. The worker is totally at the whim of the employer.

Zero hour contracts give the employer huge power. I remember talking to care assistants, who came to support my mother in her last years. All were on zero hours contracts. When I mentioned joining a union or protesting about some injustice, they would say that the hours would be cut or dismissal follow.

Many of the injustices of such insecure contracts have been exposed over recent years. There has been progress, such as the living wage campaign but the gig economy as a whole has continued to grow. What this demonstrates is a real tipping of the scales away from workers toward the employer. The unions have done great work in seeking to rebalance things, often through the courts. But there is still a long way to go before that security is put back into working people’s lives