Last year, Leicester City players James Maddison and Ayoze Perez were dropped by manager Brendon Rodgers after it emerged that the two had broken Covid guidance.
In December, Pep Guardiola dropped England stars Phil Foden and Jack Grealish from the first Manchester City team after Guardiola decided that their behaviour off the pitch was ‘not proper’.
As Guardiola said at the time: ‘When [their behaviour] off the pitch is not proper, they are not going to play.’
So, what does it say about West Ham United that Kurt Zouma could be filmed taking part in sickening animal abuse and then start against Watford in the next game?
For those who haven’t seen it, the French international was caught on film slapping and kicking his pet cat, in footage uploaded to Snapchat.
The RSPCA said on Wednesday it had seized both his pet cats.
The story of West Ham so far this season has been one of brilliance on the pitch and incompetence off it.
A team threatening to qualify for the Champions League and going deep into cup competitions. This has been one of the best seasons I can remember as a West Ham fan.
Sorry, this video isn't available any more.
So, it is incredibly frustrating that the actions of the people running the club is threatening to ruin all of that.
Manager David Moyes defended the decision to start Zouma by claiming it was simply his job to get three points for the Hammers.
But football games do not take place in a void, unaffected by real-world events.
Players are people and their play is impacted by their personal lives.
West Ham fans are people too (a controversial opinion to some) and it’s much harder to support footballers who put on the claret and blue if those players turn out to be cruel and abusive off the pitch.
What a brilliant message it would have sent if Zouma had been dropped and replaced by an academy graduate, like Ben Johnson or Harrison Ashby.
Players who represent the legacy and legend of West Ham United as they come from the club’s ‘academy of football’.
Instead, a decision was made to start Zouma and in doing so the club’s reputation took a hit and the players had to deal with a huge distraction during the game.
The verdict of fans was clear, with both home and away supporters booing Zouma’s every touch throughout the game.
To make matters worse, it’s not clear the decision even made sense in footballing terms Zouma played poorly for long periods of the game, and it wasn’t until the second half that West Ham began to really threaten the Watford goal.
Perhaps in this instance, Moyes could learn something from Gareth Southgate and the way he responded to some fans booing the England team when they took the knee last summer.
If he had wanted to, Southgate could have claimed his role was to make ‘footballing’ decisions and steered clear when politicians argued over whether the player should take the knee and whether fans should boo.
But he didn’t, he recognised that the team he managed was more than just a football team.
He intervened, he backed his players, he condemned the fans that booed, and he explained exactly why the team was taking the knee and what it meant to him.
In doing so he elevated the England team to a national symbol of hope that the entire country eventually rallied around, giving a solid riposte to opportunistic politicians in the process.
West Ham have taken the other route.
Instead of demonstrating the values of West Ham Football club by suspending Zouma, we’ve shown the footballing world that we’re quick to discard values if we think they might get in the way of winning.
Nor did the decision to play Zouma make any business sense. West Ham United is a huge, multinational business, worth more than half a billion pounds, with fans across the globe.
If the club creates a reputation for itself that it is cold and callous, even in the face of animal abuse, then sponsors will drop us, and future investors will be deterred.
In 2022, Premier League football clubs are global brands that need to protect their image on and off the pitch. It’s worrying that the West Ham hierarchy don’t seem to understand that.
The short-sighted decision to allow Zouma to play may have been made by the manager, but that Moyes even had a decision to make is testament to the lack of leadership shown by West Ham’s owners. This is a decision that shouldn’t have been left in the hands of a manager whose livelihood depends on winning games.
The West Ham ownership (David Sullivan and David Gold with the recent addition of the quiet partner Daniel Kretinsky) should have stepped in and made it clear that Zouma couldn’t start.
Yes, the manager picks the team but when players cross the line and bring the club into disrepute, it’s the club hierarchy as a whole that needs to step in and take action.
But these are owners who have continually failed to put the club first. From the botched move to the soulless concrete bowl better known as the London Stadium, to the failure to back the manager in the January transfer window, it’s clear that our club’s recent success is in danger of being squandered by poor decision making by the owners.
Putting on a West Ham shirt should be a privilege that can be lost if you let down the club either on or off the pitch.
But this week those running the club appear to have forgotten that and in doing so they let the fans down and demonstrated clearly that this is a team that is succeeding in spite of – not because of – our owners.
West Ham has now fined Zouma £250,000 – two weeks’ worth of wages – and axed him from the squad for the next game.
But with news of sponsors already cutting ties with the club this may be a case of too little, too late.
Do you have a story you’d like to share? Get in touch by emailing jess.austin@metro.co.uk.
Share your views in the comments below.
MORE : Raith Rovers were my club for 30 years, until they signed a rapist
MORE : Petition calling for Kurt Zouma to be prosecuted for kicking cat hits 250,000
MORE : Vitality suspend sponsorship of West Ham over Kurt Zouma cat-kicking scandal
Share this with