Alan Curbishley ended a seven-month exile from football when he was appointed West Ham manager on December 13, 2006.
The former Hammers midfielder, who spent five years at Upton Park during his playing career, was handed the reins two days after Alan Pardew had been shown the door following a 4-0 defeat at Bolton with the club sitting inside the Premier League relegation zone.
Curbishley, 49, had been out of work since ending his 15-year reign at Charlton, where he had taken charge of 729 games, and he admitted the opportunity handed to him by new chairman Eggert Magnusson had come out of the blue.
He said at the time: “I was sitting at home on Monday morning minding my own business, enjoying the break, then suddenly it all erupted.
“When I started to think about it and the potential, it was drawing me and something clicked.”
The new manager made an instant impact as Nigel Reo-Coker fired his side to a 1-0 home win over Manchester United in his first game at the helm.
However, they failed to win any of their next 11 league games and took only three points in the process before a run of seven victories in their last nine, including a final day 1-0 win at Old Trafford in which Carlos Tevez – whose presence at Upton Park was the subject of a prolonged legal battle – scored the decisive goal which kept them up.
Curbishley guided the club to a 10th-placed finish and the Carling Cup quarter-finals in his first full season in charge despite a rash of injuries, although he went into the new campaign under pressure and tendered his resignation after defenders Anton Ferdinand and George McCartney had been sold to Sunderland against his wishes.
He said in a statement: “The selection of players is critical to the job of the manager and I had an agreement with the club that I alone would determine the composition of the squad.
“However, the club continued to make significant player decisions without involving me. In the end, such a breach of trust and confidence meant that I had no option but to leave.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here