West Ham took a massive gamble in the summer with a transfer outlay to the tune of £164m – the third most of any club in the Premier League. It was a statement of intent from the Londoners as they sought to capitalise on two years of progress under David Moyes.
In came the attacking duo of Lucas Paqueta from Lyon and Gianluca Scamacca from Sassuolo for a combined outlay of £70m alone. There was a sense that West Ham had pulled off a coup, not least with Scamacca, who had just broken into the Italy team and was a target for some of Europe's elite clubs.
In an attempt to break into that exclusive rank – having reached the semi-finals of last season's Europa League – West Ham figured that lavishing big money on the squad would be the answer.
In their previous two campaigns, Moyes had guided the club to sixth and seventh-place finishes respectively so the summer spree, which resulted in the signing of eight players, was meant to be the next step in achieving a sustained assault on Champions League qualification. Instead, it has been a campaign in which West Ham have flirted with disaster. They sit just four points above the relegation zone and they only do so because of a five-game run which has yielded eight points to hoist them clear of trouble.
It has led to rising pressure on Moyes and not just from outwith. Following the recent 5-1 thrashing by Newcastle United, the man himself – no stranger to the exit door following the sack/his resignation at Manchester United, Sunderland, and during his first spell at West Ham – admitted that he was in a perilous position.
“As manager you always have to front up,” he said. “I’m a big boy, I’ve left jobs at other times in the past and if that happens I’ll have to go with that. But I really like my job here, I’ve enjoyed my time here greatly and I really hope we’ve got a couple of big days ahead in the future.”
And so Moyes made good on his forecast by returning to the tried-and-trusted formula that has given him so much joy previously.
In their past two matches, the Scot has opted to reinstall his old guard in the starting line-up: those such as Aaron Cresswell, Mikhail Antonio, Angelo Ogbonna and Vladimir Coufal, players who have served the Scot well before.
Two weekends ago, West Ham beat Fulham to record their first away victory since defeating Aston Villa in August. Yesterday, they were unlucky not to beat the league leaders Arsenal, having trailed 2-0 before battling back to put a serious dent in their London neighbours' title hopes while simultaneously boosting their own survival hopes with a performance that had many of the hallmarks of previous seasons.
Matthew Upson, their former player, gave plenty of the credit to their manager for the resurgence.
"They've ground it out and what David Moyes brings is he's got that strength, that character, that discipline, and West Ham played like that today.
"Yes, there were mistakes and they haven't been good enough with the ball but they've got a bit of steel about them and I think that runs through the club and the squad from the manager down."
In a season when managerial sackings have come to be seen as a silver bullet for onfield woes in the Premier League – a record number of 12 have lost their jobs in England's top flight – it seemed as if it would only be a matter of time before Moyes would become the next to go
Mikael Arteta, the Arsenal manager, made plenty of noise about his side's lack of self-belief at the London Stadium yesterday but to anyone watching they looked as formidable as ever in forging that two-goal advantage. Instead, the fact that West Ham wrested the game away from Arsenal seemed to have more to do with the host's high tempo than it did with any capitulation by the visitors.
It is still likely that West Ham will give serious consideration to their managerial options this summer but they would do well to remember what – or more accurately who – took them to their previously lofty heights in the first place.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here