An injury crisis is the worst nightmare for any club, and West Ham have certainly started the season with one. A quick glance at the Premier League injury table and you will see the Hammers with a strong lead over any competition, with over half of their first team players missing the first three games.
As a result of this, the start of West Ham’s season hasn’t been ideal with just three points out of a possible nine. However, even if they had their full squad available to them, would the Hammers have fared any different?
Manchester City and Chelsea away are arguably two of West Ham’s hardest three games this season. To get them out of the way at the start of the season is a bonus and if you could choose any games for your big players to miss, they would be two of them. Would Dimitri Payet have made an impact when we lost 3-1 to Manchester City? Absolutely, but it wouldn’t have been enough to beat the title favourites on their home ground.
The Hammers next two games are Watford at home and West Brom away. Payet, Lanzini and Feghouli will have much more of an impact on those games than they would have at Stamford Bridge and the Etihad and they’re two games which West Ham are expected to win. It’s better to have your best players for your must-win games rather than the games which the team is not expected to win even with a full squad.
Having a deeper squad for the next two months is much more important than having one for the first three games, especially when West Ham’s next six fixtures are taking into consideration. Obviously, it’s ideal to not have an injury crisis at any point in the season, but most clubs have one at some point each year, and West Ham’s might just have come at the right time.
