EmpicsRobin van Persie celebrates his deflected winner against West Ham

Nice to get back to some football after the fracas of the last few days. Nice to turn the clock back too.

Unable to travel to Manchester in mid-week and stuck in a dull hotel with little to do other than worry about the score at Old Trafford, I decided to eschew the pleasures of watching the rings appear on the otherwise excellent ESPN matchday coverage and pop out for a glass of wine and a pizza. The thinking behind this daring ploy? To get back to the Stone Age before the Year Zero of the Premier League, nationwide coverage on TV and radio and - gulp! - the internet. Yes kids, there once was a time when watching the Match of the Day highlights was the first you knew of the score and I fully intended to re-visit those times.

- Payne: Van Persie the new Cantona?
- Early RVP strike claims points
- Van Persie reprises matchwinner role

With Manchester United leading the Premier League, I fully expected the Old Trafford game to be up first but when it wasn't first nor second ... well, your mind starts to race. If the Hammers had pulled off an unexpected away win then surely it would take top billing. But third? Did this mean it was a dull goalless draw and not worthy of top position? Or did it mean the result was so obvious that there was no desperate need to show the avalanche of shots that most people expected?

So it was that it was something like 11:15 pm before I saw the fluke Robin Van Persie goal that gave Manchester United the lead after only 33 seconds. Replays showed that, while the former Arsenal man did well to turn Winston Reid, the Dutch striker's shot took a wicked deflection off James Collins, the ball spinning over Jussi Jaaskelainen and into the net. This looked an ominous start; the fastest goal in the division this season...but still the running order confused me. If Man United were in rampant style banging in goals left right and centre wouldn't it take place over matches at Tottenham and Wigan?

Of course, what transpired over the next five minutes or so of the truncated highlights was the Hammers putting in another sterling defensive performance that frustrated the league leaders with, at times, just enough possession up front to make me think there might be a goal in it for us. Of course, when you're watching highlights you can glean quite a lot from when play is picked up; if the blue shirts and claret hoops of West Ham's away strip were shown, you hoped for an equaliser. If the red shirts came up first, it looked grim.

Ultimately, of course, what transpired was that Manchester United were not fully flowing at all, the visitors weren't able to make much of the few chances they created and that early goal was all there was between the two sides but nonetheless - as is the way when chasing a one goal deficit - West Ham were in the game until the very end.

The points went the way expected, the play probably not and five minutes might have been all that was worth taking out of the game. After succumbing once again to the joys of the World Wide Web, I was surprised to see the match reports mention a late Carlton Cole chance that went begging because it wasn't shown on TV, but Sir Alex Ferguson gave West Ham grudging respect after and said how hard it was to play them at the moment. Frankly, Sam Allardyce is pretty good at doing that.

As the manager said after the game: "We didn't take any points so it doesn't matter if you lose by one, two or five." But I don't think he believes that. Shorn of Mark Noble in midfield - probably West Ham's best player this season - due to suspension, and still with key attacking players out, this was the type of game from which players can take credit and gain confidence. It was a slightly frustrating five minutes but I'll see worse at Old Trafford and I'll cope.

Not sure I can get by without the internet though!

• Recommend0
• Tweet0
• Email