Sporting president labels West Ham owners 'the Dildo brothers' as war of words over William Carvalho deepens

West Ham co-owners David Gold and Sullivan
Getty Images
James Benge6 September 2017

The war of words between Sporting Lisbon and West Ham escalated further today as the Portuguese side’s president labelled the Hammers joint-chairman “the Dildo Brothers”.

Relations between the two clubs have grown increasingly frosty since the closure of the transfer window, which saw William Carvalho remain at Sporting despite interest from West Ham.

David Sullivan, who along with David Gold owns an 86 per cent stake in West Ham, subsequently claimed that Sporting had accepted a bid from the English side for defensive midfielder Carvalho but that there had not been enough time to carry out “adequate medical checks” for what it is understood would have been a club record deal.

Sporting’s director of communications, Nuno Saraiva, subsequently accused David Sullivan of lying, insisting no bid had been submitted for Carvalho, and labelled him “a parasite”. West Ham are pursuing libel action against him.

In Pictures | West Ham's summer signings | 2017-18

1/5

David Sullivan Jr, the son of the Hammers’ co-chairman, said on Twitter: “West Ham are commencing legal proceedings against the communications director of sporting Lisbon as a written offer for the player was made.

“To Bruno de Carvalho the president of sporting Lisbon. To say we never made an offer is nonsense and serious libel.”

But the feud deepened today with a comment from Sporting president Bruno de Carvalho, who called on West Ham fans to demand “the truth” over the failed pursuit of the Portuguese international.

Speaking to Sporting TV in Portugal, he said: “Where is it? Proof? Now, approaches, for sure. I’ve had them for almost the whole squad: West Ham supporters call Mr. David Sullivan and his brother, the Dildo Brothers…

“These messengers, these offended virgins, the president of West Ham… We must tell the truth!”

West Ham have declined to comment on the matter but are continuing to pursue their legal action against Saraiva.