Non-Story of the Week

Today The Daily Mail claim Tevez threw 'a tantrum' over the temporary accommodation given him by West Ham in Canary Wharf. They report that West Ham responded by moving him "to a bigger apartment". So even if Tevez did complain (which I assume is conjecture by the reporter) the fact that West Ham have responded to his request suggests there was no 'major row' as the shit rag reports.

This seems sympyomatic of the controversy that the newspapers want to create around the Hammers at the moment.

I think there are two major points here:

1. West Ham have landed Tevez and Mascherano in a deal that might probably involve the players still being owned by their agents. If this is true West Ham have landed two very good players on the cheap for a year and Tevez and Mascherano hopefully increase their value in the European market. As far as I can see no one loses, everyone's happy - no controversy.

2. West Ham are in talks about a possible take-over. The individuals involved behind this deal may be not as white as the driven snow. Fair enough - investigate away - West Ham fans are as interested, if not more, in the characters who might end up owning our club. And hats off to The Guardian for the investigative journalism that they have been carrying out on some of the rumoured men behind this deal.

But today's story in The Mail is the kind of half arsed, conjective and (I assume) fabricated crap that most of the media have been throwing West Ham's way in the last couple of weeks.

Which brings me back to a point I made two day's ago. The Spuds and Slavia Prague, who played each other this week, are owned by the same people. Now, and someone please correct me if I am wrong, but this is expressly against UEFA rules. So why FFS are the newspapers obsessed with a possible take-over at West Ham when there appears to be real corruption already in existence.