Crystal Palace are closing in on Thomas Frank after sacking Pierre Sage, and their move for the former Brentford and Tottenham boss could leave West Ham’s new ownership facing some uncomfortable questions about ambition.

Daniel Kretinsky and his fellow West Ham executives have had plenty to contend with since taking the reins following the departures of David Sullivan, Karren Brady and others, with the club having dropped out of the Premier League.

Kretinsky’s decision to retain Nuno Espírito Santo after relegation proved a mistake given he decided to sack the Portuguese just weeks after he was named the Championship manager of the month.

There have also been question marks over summer recruitment, with West Ham looking short in several key areas despite the quality they were expected to possess compared to their rivals.

Now the spotlight falls on the appointment of Scott Parker, which came just 24 hours after Nuno’s departure.

The timing was hardly ideal. West Ham conceded three first-half goals at Cardiff before rescuing a draw, then lost 2-1 at Blackburn in Parker’s first two games.

Parker’s appointment has divided supporters. Some saw the logic in bringing back a former captain who has achieved three promotions from the Championship. Others questioned whether the club was thinking ambitiously enough, given his dismal record in the Premier League.

Now Crystal Palace’s pursuit of Thomas Frank could intensify that debate.

Crystal Palace’s move for Frank puts West Ham under scrutiny

A large number of West Ham supporters wanted the club to pursue Frank when David Moyes was coming towards the end of his time in charge.

The Dane had transformed Brentford into an established Premier League side and was widely admired for the work he had done with comparatively limited resources.

West Ham ultimately appointed Julen Lopetegui instead. Frank remained at Brentford before moving to Tottenham in 2025, where his spell ended in dismissal in February this year.

He has been out of work since, but Palace are now said to be on the verge of bringing the Dane back into management.

There is an obvious question for Kretinsky and the board: was Frank seriously considered when they assessed their options before appointing Parker?

West Ham say they looked at 10 managers before deciding on Parker. If Frank was among them, supporters can reasonably ask why Parker was considered the better choice. If he was not, they can ask why a manager with Frank’s record and experience was overlooked.

The difference between the two managers in the Premier League is striking.

Frank has taken charge of 178 top-flight matches with Brentford and Tottenham, winning 61, drawing 46 and losing 71. That works out at 1.29 points per game, marginally short of David Moyes’ 1.4 points per game record in his career in the top flight.

West Ham cannot afford to let goodwill become complacency

Parker, by comparison, has managed 86 Premier League matches with Fulham, Bournemouth and Burnley. He has won just 13, drawn 21 and lost 52, averaging 0.70 points per game.

Frank’s Tottenham spell was far from successful, but his work at Brentford was impressive. He guided the Bees into the Premier League and then established them in the division, finishing ninth at one point.

Parker’s strongest argument is his Championship record. He has secured three promotions with Fulham, Bournemouth and Burnley, compared with Frank’s one with Brentford.

That is a perfectly legitimate reason for West Ham to have favoured Parker if the overriding objective was simply to get back into the Premier League as quickly as possible.

But there is a bigger question about what happens afterwards.

West Ham are not supposed to be planning just for promotion. They should be building a club capable of staying in the top flight and competing again, rather than returning only to find themselves fighting another relegation battle.

After all, Nils Koppen has been telling new signings West Ham want to compete for Europe when they are back in the big time.

West Ham are a huge club and if a Palace side battling relegation can lure Frank then the Hammers, who could be trading places with the Eagles in six months would surely have been able to do the same.

It is too early to write off Parker of course or suggest Frank would have been a better appointment. Parker does have a proven ability to get teams promoted and deserves the opportunity to demonstrate that he can do it again.

But the decision to appoint him will inevitably be judged against the alternatives available and the ambition the ownership claims to have.

If Frank takes Palace away from danger and establishes them in the Premier League while Parker struggles to get West Ham promoted, questions will understandably be asked.

Kretinsky and the board have enjoyed a period of goodwill from supporters who wanted change at the club. But that goodwill will not last indefinitely.

The West Ham hierarchy must prove that their ambition extends beyond simply getting back to where the club was before. After all, it was that kind of short-termism that got the Hammers in this mess in the first place.