As a realistic West Ham supporter who has resigned himself to the knowledge that he will most probably never see his team win the Premier League, all we as fans have left is the prospect that we may pick up a trophy every 30 years or so, produce local talent that makes you proud, and produce a brand of football that is good on the eye. My first hero was Geoff Hurst, second was Trevor Brooking, closely followed by Devo. All three played in West Ham teams that struggled, as did Bobby Moore, Peters, Cottee, McAvennie, DiCanio, Cole, Lampard, etc etc etc. What I'm trying to say is without style the substance means very little. As mad as it seems to many, I would take losing 2-3 in a great game over winning 1-0 brutal and ugly, any day of the week. As West Ham fans, it's all we have left. If SUGO put a "footballing" team out onto the pitch, you will find people quite prepared to take the "pinches of salt" needed to endure Sullivan's outbursts. Turn West Ham into another Bolton/Stoke, long ball into the channels, feed of the scraps, percentage team, and prepare to see their "vision" go down the toilet.
I know genuine West Ham fans wouldn't put up with it!

Disagree regarding formation at Goodison. We've had very few decent away performances this season, but one where tactically Zola actually got it right was at Villa Park, where we played with Nouble on his own up front. As it happened we could have nicked that one, and I feel similar tactics should be employed up at Goodison. Keeping the midfield packed and tight, restricting the likes of Piennar is essential. We need to press hard, which has all but dried up of late, and be disciplined behind the ball. I'm unconvinced that either Mido or McCarthy are mobile enough to support Cole in leading the line, so I'd prefer to use the extra man shoring up the midfield. A point would be a result, and could be the difference between Coca Cola or Champagne come the end of the season!

The real worry I have with the proposed move, is doing so whilst still indebted and 50% owned by Icelandic bankers. I obviously don't know the real ins and outs of our ownership structure, but have no doubt that our moving to the new stadium was G&S's hook that appealed to Straumur in the takeover.
In theory, 50% of any money generated by West Ham (i.e sale of The Boleyn) could be swallowed up paying off debt, and we'd still be owned by Icelandic bankers. They could then happily make tidy money from the club whilst we lease a new stadium that we don't own. I may not have understood the implications of the Icelandic involvement, or maybe other people haven't. I genuinely don't know. But the sale of 50% of the club to G&S has always confused me, when Fernandes Intermarket and even Cellini were looking for 100%. We all believed that Straumur wanted to sell the whole club, just maybe the sell off of the ground swayed them to re-think?