WEST HAM deny there was an agreement with West Brom to ban Robert Snodgrass from playing against them.
West Brom boss Sam Allardyce blurted it out on TV before his team’s 2-1 defeat to the in-form Irons on Tuesday night and the Premier League is now investigating a possible breach of rules.
West Ham also believe they have a crucial piece of evidence that will put them in the clear over the episode which could cost both clubs a fine or even points deductions.
An insider said: “If there had been an agreement that Snodgrass was not allowed to play against West Ham, why did he travel to London Stadium for the game?
“What would have been the point of that if there was no way he was going to play?”
Snodgrass played a full 90 minutes for his new club against Wolves at the weekend – having managed only four minutes in total this season in the Premier League for his former club.
Sources at West Ham suspect Allardyce preferred not to risk Snodgrass in a second tough game in succession having been mothballed for much of this campaign and that he was making mischief with the media.
Premier League rules prohibit clubs entering such private agreements before permanent transfers.
It is acceptable in loan deals for players to be ineligible against their parent clubs.
West Ham won 2-1 with goals from Jarrod Bowen and Michail Antonio to put them in contention for a European spot next season if their form continues.
It was their third Premier League win in a row and goalscorer Bowen admits it was a gritty game but winning is all that counts.
Bowen said: “It’s three points which is what we wanted. We knew it was going to be tough.
“We knew they were going to be organised and look to frustrate us when we had the ball.
“It probably wasn’t our best performance, and we gave the ball away a lot, but it was always going to be a grind and hard work.
“We dug right in until the last, and we got an ugly three points, but three points are all that matters.”
