Speaking exclusively with Football FanCast, Carlton Palmer says that West Ham United’s decision to block Robert Snodgrass from playing for West Bromwich Albion was “nonsense”.
Snodgrass joined the Baggies on an 18-month deal for a nominal fee earlier this month, that will rise through bonuses should Sam Allardyce manage to keep The Hawthorns’ natives in the Premier League.
The midfielder was unable to represent his new side when Albion visited the London Stadium days after his deal was finalised, sparking a Premier League investigation after Allardyce claimed there was an agreement between the two sides for the Scot not to feature, something backed up by ExWHUemployee on Twitter which was presumably agreed to by GSB.
Snodgrass had played the full 90 minutes of West Brom’s previous game against Wolverhampton Wanders the weekend before, and returned to the starting line-up next time out at home to Manchester City and again featured against Fulham this weekend.
West Ham won the Baggies affair 2-1 through goals from Jarrod Bowen and Michail Antonio, which Allardyce deplored his side for allowing with no Premier League club conceding more often this season.
When asked if West Ham were wrong to stop Snodgrass from playing against them, Palmer told FFC: “Absolutely. To be honest with you, Sam was bitterly disappointed with the West Ham game.
“I don’t get it. I really do not get it and it happened to me before. A club sells a player, so West Ham clearly don’t want Snodgrass. He’s not been playing. He hasn’t played in ages, and they’ve sold him. Why should they be allowed to put a clause in that he couldn’t play against his former club?
“When I left Leeds United, George Graham didn’t want me. But he put a clause in [that] I couldn’t play against Leeds. It’s crazy. If you don’t want a player, you don’t want a player because you don’t think he’s good enough. He doesn’t fit in your team. So, if he doesn’t fit in your team, why are you putting a clause in that he can’t play against you? It’s nonsense.
“I think if Snodgrass plays against West Ham, they come extremely close to nicking a draw there. They’re vastly improved. Sam will have been disappointed that they conceded the goals that they do. And I think he’ll be looking to strengthen in that area. But, certainly, with Sam coming in, they’re improving all the time.
“Sam would have said to the club: ‘This is what we need to do, we need to bring better quality in’. He’s already said that openly. ‘We need better quality and to improve the squad that we’ve got’. I’m sure, knowing Sam, he’s always built on keeping clean sheets. So, he’ll be bitterly disappointed, as I saw with his interview with the goals that conceded against West Ham.
“And, in the last kick of the game, they could have nicked a draw, which would have been massive for them, because the next game is they’re playing Man City, who are bang in form.
“But you target games that you can get results in, and Sam would have targeted West Ham to nick a point. So, in his mind, he’s probably a point down because they’ve not got games to play with.”
Any such agreement between West Ham and West Brom for Snodgrass to not feature at the London Stadium would appear to go against Premier League regulations, which state that no club is permitted to have any influence over the availability of a player they do not own.
Snodgrass had been resigned to a bit-part role under David Moyes before his exit, playing just four minutes of top-flight football beside a key role in the Irons’ Carabao Cup efforts.
AND in other news, GSB may rue missed West Ham deal for “excellent” 10-goal striker…