'A battle for the soul of West Ham' is how one newspaper reported it. I'm not sure it's that; West Ham's soul was lost long ago when the Premier League and Sky declared Year Zero and effectively ended the life of family-run teams with an eye on local talent, good football and a quaint traditional way of running things. Once the 'new boss' decided it was a multi-million pound business and a world-wide franchise then teams like West Ham were always going to run hard and fast to keep up with the whirl of expectation. Inevitably, it's been a struggle as it's never been best to expect anything from West Ham. When you expect little, you get more back.

Even so, awful as Tuesday's result was, I must admit I was a bit surprised to see the missive sent round to Members and Season Ticket holders from new owner David Sullivan describing the team's performance as 'pathetic' and 'shambolic'. Some will say 'well, he's right' and defend his actions others, like me, think that this type of grandstanding is no way to run a football club and any man whose sartorial stance extends to a claret velvet jacket really ought to make more attempt to avoid having his photo on the back pages . I salute Gianfranco's decision to confront the abuse of his players and agree that this could cause more damage to the squad, it already being noted that Matthew Upson has described the comments as 'unhelpfull'. I suspect the language of the dressing room was much more colourful.

On the other hand, I do feel the galvanising effect of men with backs against the wall and, whatever the rights and wrongs of Sullivan's outburst, there could possibly be a positive from this. The Hammers are now acting like cornered animals and I think it's a mindset that could well prove a benefit; cornered animals tend to fight harder. West Ham have a number of home games to come that could easily net them the points they need to avoid relegation if they approach them the right way. I'm expecting the odd shock away result too - I refuse to believe they will go the whole season with only one win under their belts - and that can mount up to a serious haul of points at this stage of the campaign.

Some West Ham internet forums have suggested that the players have ceased to 'play for Zola' but I think that unlikely. Even if that were the case, if there is any truth in the story that Zola instructed assistant Steve Clarke to tell Sullivan he was barred from attending a team meeting at the training ground, then I think it is likely to have worked in the little Italian's favour. Players don't like being criticised by those who haven't been professional's themselves and it's likely to have scored a few points for a man who is being painted, by some fans at least, as 'weak'. In fact, I'd suggest this stand against the owners gives lie to those opinions and indicates that there is more to Zola's management style than some give him credit for.

I hope so. I like Zola and would be pleased as punch if he pulled us out of this mess. Sadly, I think his long-term future is probably in doubt and I fear for the type of involvement that Gold and, particularly Sullivan, will foist on any succesive manager as a result. But those concerns can wait. At the moment it's about surviving this season as a Premiership team and, when the in-fighting has ceased, I think there's enough left over to scrap our way out of this.