A Year On – Were West Ham United Right To Part Ways With David Moyes?

While the following days of celebration flew by after Jarrod Bowen’s 90th-minute goal won West Ham the Conference League, those four seconds between him receiving the ball and it hitting the back of the net dragged on. The festivities may have been immense, but it’s those minuscule seconds that fans would do anything to relive. Those drawn-out, excruciatingly long seconds, where the world froze in anticipation, letting the fleeting moment linger that little bit longer, are what made 43 years of hurt worth it.

Despite their thirst for further glory, on 6th May 2024 (less than a year after that special night in Prague), the Hammers announced that David Moyes would not be given a new contract and would be relieved of his duties as manager at the end of the season. What followed has been nothing short of turmoil: awful football, awful morale, and awful results. Even after such a disappointing season, though, are there signs that the club is heading in the right direction – and that they could yet still benefit from the Scot’s departure as we approach Graham Potter’s first summer transfer window in charge?

To analyse this, there are four key figures we need to examine: Tim Steidten, Julen Lopetegui, Graham Potter, and David Sullivan.

The appointment of Steidten as technical director, on paper, signified the dawn of a new era. It was the first time that Sullivan – the Hammers’ largest shareholder – had been willing to relinquish any sort of control over transfers. This was a real opportunity for the likes of the William Carvalho saga (which resulted in Sporting Lisbon’s president dubbing David Gold and David Sullivan ‘the Dildo brothers’) and so-called phantom bids to be left in the past. This couldn’t have been further from the truth.

Issues arose fairly early in his tenure at the club. He struggled to get along with Moyes while also influencing certain players behind the scenes, resulting in him being banned entirely from the training ground. This created unnecessary problems for the manager, which may have contributed to his downfall.

Last summer was Steidten’s first window with, almost, full control over incomings and he was provided with a £200 million war chest to rebuild the ageing squad Moyes had left behind. So, how did the German make his mark and prove to Sullivan that he was the right man to restructure the club around? By spending the money extremely poorly.

Admittedly, Aaron Wan-Bissaka was signed for an incredible £15 million, but the quality of the remaining signings is more subjective. Kilman, while undoubtedly a solid player, has not quite performed at the level expected of a £40 million signing. Summerville may have shown real quality, but it’s impossible to judge him a success when he’s missed half the campaign through injury. The same goes for Niclas Füllkrug, whose prior injury record should have been a red flag from day one. The rest of the recruited first-team players have fallen well below expectations, with perhaps the biggest disappointment being Jean-Clair Todibo. The Frenchman was expected to join Juventus, but when the Italian giants hesitated due to financial issues, the Irons swooped in to pull off what was thought to be an unbelievable bit of business. However, he has struggled to reach full match fitness. Even after a full season, he rarely completes a full 90 minutes.

On paper, the squad was in a much better place heading into the 2024/25 season, but results and individual performances have clearly shown otherwise. The question is: has this dire year of football been due to poor recruitment, or has it been down to the management of the players?

Although many of the most pressing issues were not addressed – a painfully slow midfield, defenders who can’t defend, and no goal-scoring striker – the biggest mistake made in recruitment may have been the selection of the manager.

Julen Lopetegui may have managed both Real Madrid and the Spanish national team, but his record with both was uninspiring. He did enjoy some success at Sevilla, winning the Europa League in 2020, but considering they’ve won the competition more than anyone else, is that really enough to judge him on?

What better indicates whether he should have been appointed is his time at Wolves. Admittedly, he left of his own accord due to not receiving the backing he had hoped for, but he was unpopular amongst their fans for playing dull football and falling out with players – both reasons West Ham fans had for wanting Moyes out.

Lopetegui was as committed as any manager could be, and he did improve how the players moved the ball around the pitch compared to Moyes. The Spaniard averaged 46.6% possession compared to his predecessor’s 43.5%. While that’s an increase, the small margin speaks volumes about Lopetegui’s tenure, especially considering the style of play was meant to have changed from counter-attacking to possession-based football.

West Ham, during the first half of the season, lacked any identity in their play. Given that the squad was full of experienced professionals – in fact, the Hammers had the oldest starting XI in the Premier League with an average age of 28 – it’s unlikely the players failed to understand tactics. Rather, the issue may have been that Lopetegui simply could not communicate his ideas effectively. Many players have since spoken about how Potter is clear in what he expects, hinting that this marks a change from the previous manager.

Additionally, Lopetegui had multiple public fallouts with his players, namely Mohammed Kudus and Todibo. However, it’s been suggested that these may have been fuelled by Steidten.

Ahead of his appointment, fans had even started a petition against Lopetegui, which garnered thousands of signatures. Ultimately, they were proven right, as he was sacked just after the turn of the year.

David Sullivan has a poor track record of only appointing managers who are cheap and out of contract. Even though this backfired massively with the former Wolves boss, it didn’t stop him doing the same again when the board selected Graham Potter as the next man to take charge.

With Potter came some radical changes – notably, Steidten (whose behaviour under Moyes had been repeated under Lopetegui) was promptly sidelined and eventually removed from the club entirely.

Since arriving, Potter’s biggest success has been fixing a defence that had been leaking goals for a year and a half. Potter has conceded 1.25 goals per game compared to 1.95 under Lopetegui and 1.45 under Moyes the previous season.

Football, however, is a results-based business, and of the three, Potter has the worst win percentage at 25%, while Lopetegui won 31.8% of his games. Moyes just edges Potter with a 26.3% win rate in the second half of last season.

Unfortunately for Potter, he inherited a squad with nothing to play for. The Irons were never in any real danger of relegation, as the three promoted teams lacked the quality to compete, and Europe was already out of reach by January. A massive overhaul is expected in the summer, so it was always going to be difficult to motivate players who know they’re likely leaving to perform with intensity.

Without a full pre-season and the chance to sign players suited to his system, it would be unfair to fully judge the Englishman. That said, it only takes a glance at how well Vítor Pereira has done with someone else’s players at Wolves to understand why many are not optimistic.

Overall, getting rid of David Moyes has not been a successful decision a year later – but does that mean it was the wrong decision? Not necessarily. West Ham had – and still arguably have – an opportunity to push on to a new level. If not for the division caused by Steidten and, more importantly, if the board had been willing to invest properly in a manager, the club could have seized that chance.

As frustrating as it is, the only thing truly holding the club back is the ownership. If they showed ambition and tried to match the enormous potential this club possesses, they may have ended up with a top manager. Had that happened, the decision not to offer Moyes a new contract would be far less controversial.

Under the right ownership, Moyes leaving could have been the start of something special; under the current ownership, it was the end of it instead