Liverpool FC Forum

by **Leonmc0708** » Mon Jul 19, 2004 8:33 pm

Despite the fact that both Bill Kenwright and Paul Gregg insist there is no power struggle at Everton, there are few people in or around football that would beleive them. There is clearly a major difference of opinion on how Everton should be run, and this problem was highlighted in the resignation of Trevor Birch.

Blues' director, Paul Gregg went public with his proposals for Everton Football Club in the LiverpoolECHO on Friday - proposals which included amongst many others diluting his and Bill Kenwrights company, True Blues' shareholdings back into the club to allow new investors to come forward.

Gregg, who joined the board in 2000 when the failed Kings Dock stadium plans were being formulated, claims there are a number of people on Merseyside willing to invest up to £15m in Goodison. He also believes the club could raise a further £15m via a fans share issue.

Gregg said in the Echo interview, "The board will have to now interview prospective candidates for the position of chief executive but in the interim period I'm happy to stay at Goodison and help with the issues that need addressing, if Bill wants that."

Those final four words are the most pertinent ones. Gregg has largely been a silent partner, if not a sleeping one, since he helped Kenwright set up the True Blue Holdings group five years ago. And his decision to find a very public voice now has been greeted with suspicion in some quarters, with many blue noses thinking it is purely a money thing with Mr Gregg looking to protect his investment.

I personally think this is a lesson for the Liverpool board and fans, those who have in the past sanctioned moves by Steve Morgan and certain Thai primeministers to invest in the club.

Trevor Birch is largely thought of as responsible for the success of Chelski, during the inemitable Ken Bates years, and in brokering the Abramorvich deal. He is also recognised as the only reason that Leeds United Football Club still exists. Yet the man felt he needed to resign fundementally due to the power struggle and boardroom problems over at Jurassic Park. This is at a club where the leading board members and largest shareholders are in fact part of the same company.

Imagine the problems LFC might have faced if Steve Morgan had managed to secure a seat on the board, with his forthright and well publicised opposition to David Moores' regime.

I shudder at the possible problems the board may have faced had they decided to take up Mr Shinawatra's offer of investment and given him a place on the board. With the obvious motive of the Thai contingents to promote and develop the club in the Far East.

I personally think it was and should be regarded as a close shave, for all the problems that people on this forum placed at the door of David Moores towards the end of Gerard Houlliers reign, he has, and continues to, make the right decisions for the good of the club and the supporters.

Rafael Benitez's appointment will I beleive prove to be a momentous decision, and the securing of the best player that this club has seen in the last ten years at Anfield is a masterstroke. I think it is time that some people gave the man and indeed the rest of the board the credit they are due.

by **Gareth G** » Mon Jul 19, 2004 8:50 pm

Great post Leon, it's an eye opener for any club really.

I for one have never doubted the boards decisions...of course i have been unsure what they have been up to before, but never actually doubted them.

by **115-1073096938** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 12:37 am

Totally agree and the only doubt i've ever had about Parry and Moores was the sacking of Houllier at the time they done it, HOWEVER.... with hindisight it APPEARS to correct decision.

Hopefully they will be proven right and all these people who were quick to call for there heads can take a long hard look at themselves then realise that these men do actually know what they are doing and do know whats best for this club.

by **stapo1000** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 2:48 am

i have to say that you've opened my eyes leon. If there are conflicts within the board, like at Everton, it can f.uck the club right up. I was always in favour of Morgans bid being accepted but, because he was pro-groundshare etc. it would've meant that the new board was a loose cannon. same goes for the thai bid cos they were lookin for an extra seat on the board...

by **JBG** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 11:52 am

Good post Leon, but whats going on at Everton doesn't necessarily make Moores shine in comparison.

He is a good man who clearly loves the club and in that respect you cannot fault him, but the fundamental problem remains that under his reign Liverpool have slipped from being the strongest club in Britain to being one of the also rans.

A number of the managment appointments and countless failed transfer signings must rest with him.

HOWEVER, hopefully he has finally got it right with Benitez.....hopefully.

I too was and am against any Thai investment. What good is a short term injection of £30-40m in transfer kitty if the deal copperfastened our decline?

by **115-1073096938** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 6:42 pm

JBG, Houllier wasn't a complete failiure.

I think Houllier and Babbel's illnesses cost this club dear.

by **Fowler_E7** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 6:55 pm

i dont think you can say that the abscence of one player led to our current position, the season that baros was ill we finished second and got to the last eight of the CL

by **7_Kewell** » Tue Jul 20, 2004 7:03 pm

I think Houllier and Babbel's illnesses cost this club dear.

I agree.

Liverpool FC Forum

A lesson to be learnt from across the park ? - Credit where it is due me thinks

Who is online