George Gillett and Tom Hicks are set to be seen in public together for the first time this year at Wednesday night’s Champions League clash at Arsenal. And Rick Parry won’t be there to referee it.
The Liverpool co-owners have fallen out and are looking to get each other out of the club. Although Tom Hicks’ sons have been to a number of Liverpool games of late, Hicks himself hasn’t been to one this year. Neither George Gillett nor son Foster have been to any either.
But on Thursday night Gillett announced he was ending his spell away from the game, speaking to a Canadian radio show: “Foster and I are going to be going over to the Arsenal game next week and we’ve just decided this is an extraordinary time and we’re going to enjoy it and we’re going to be there and by God we’re going to try and be a positive influence on this process.”
The Hicks family had planned to be at the game long before Gillett’s announcement, but are now believed to have snapped up 16 of the available 20 tickets for the director’s box on Wednesday. When Gillett asked for four it meant there were none left for David Moores or Rick Parry.
No doubt Parry will find a ticket from somewhere, but some fans feel it is poetic justice that he’s at risk of missing out on a big game in this way. When Liverpool qualified for Athens and the ballot for tickets began he was blamed for what was described as a fiasco. Accusations were aimed at him that an already poor allocation from UEFA had been allocated unfairly by the club. These accusations were never satisfactorily answered.
Interview between fans and Rick Parry.
RICK PARRY: Can you tell us how many tickets were available in the director’s box and how many directors were entered into the director’s box?
Fans: We’re not going to go into the breakdown of the 20 tickets because we don’t think that serves any useful purpose. It isn’t going to produce any more tickets.
PARRY: One of the arguments we’ve had from directors is that they do not understand why they cannot have transparency on this.
Fans: Well, they never have. We have never given a full breakdown of where tickets go and, as I say, that would not help or produce any more tickets.
PARRY: Some directors have suggested it is imperative that the fans tell them the numbers involved in the director’s box.
Fans: No, it is not imperative that we get involved in the numbers game.
The imperative thing is that the number of people who got tickets was in proportion to the numbers in the ballot. So the ratio of owner guests to directors that actually ended up with tickets was exactly the ratio of the numbers of people in the directors’ box.
There have been suggestions that we favoured out-of-towners. That’s ridiculous. Why would we? What would we even contemplate doing that for?
It wasn’t conducted in the ticket office. There have been suggestions of collusion but it was done in a completely independent, computer generated process which could not be interfered with.
And once people had gone into the director’s box there was an even spread. They all had an equal chance and that’s how the tickets have come out.
RICK PARRY: Is there any suggestion there might have been any glitches with the system?
Fans: No. None at all.
There have not been any glitches but, clearly, as we have said all along there were nowhere near enough tickets. It’s as simple as that.
There has been no conspiracy, no manipulation. A number of people have been successful in the director’s box, albeit not as many as we would have liked. It’s not as if no-one is emerging from the directors’ box with a ticket.
RICK PARRY: One final time. Is there any way you could let us know any details of the numbers involved in the directors’ box?
Fans: No. I don‘t think we will because we have never given out numbers in the past and there is nothing new or mystical this time round.
We haven’t allocated them on any different basis this time. We have been entirely consistent in the treatment and to develop a witchhunt of why did those tickets go there? I don‘t think it would serve any useful purpose.
But the root of it is that the problem essentially lies with not getting enough tickets in the first place. That’s a frustration that we all share.
I’m glad someone came up with a word after all the silence from many parts and only Hicks barking everytime the word "selling the club" shows up!… I’m not a fan of Rick, but I’m not against him considering I’ve never seen or dealth with any of his issues before to be honest, but it’s good that someone finally spoke out and made an effing statement on this shit. Someone has got to give now, and it better happen as soon as possible.
I can find no sympathy for Rick Parry. He, it seems to me, personifies the current pitiful state of our club’s public persona. He is vilified throughout “forumland” as the person most responsible for the introduction of Hicks and Gillett to our lives. David Moores, in contrast, gets an easier ride, being seen as a likeable but intellectually challenged businessman.
Whether the fans are correct in apportioning blame for the sale of the club to the americans is debateable as is the perception that Parry’s prevarication (or downright incompetence) has complicated almost every transfer in or out of the club since he became involved.
What, to me, is beyond debate is Parry’s singular failure to act as I would have expected the club Chief Executive to during these 12 months or so of internecine squabbling. He has projected an image of a weak vacillating individual standing aside when needed and with an eye for switching his bets as each of the protagonists have had their time as frontrunner.
We needed a CEO in the Harvey Jones mold able to stand tall above the morass and convey to the fans and the world outside the club calm, confidence and competence. We needed reassurance that an experienced capable leader was in place making sure that business was being done as usual despite the boardroom shenanigans. What we have had is the invisible man.
I’ve no doubt that there will be apologist’s for Rick Parry hoping to help rehabilitate his image with the fans by insisting that he was only trying to maintain “The Liverpool Way”. This will be an insult to our history and especially the memories of such stalwarts as Peter Robinson, Bill Shankly and Bob Paisley who would always be first over the parapet when it came to standing up for the club.
For any new regime wanting to re-establish and develop our club’s hard won international “brand” a change of CEO is a pre-requisite!
I am 100% behind highlighting the failures of Parry.
He does personify the very worst aspects of our club. He prevaricated over Stevie G’s contract. He’s cost us other signings besides. His respect for the fans appears to be close to zero, given the way he handled not only the ticket fiasco but in securing ‘bill and ben’ to run our Club. But most of all to have him bark on about the ‘Liverpool Way’ when he has toyed with us and the club in recent times shows he knows nothing about what being a true custodian is all about.
He deserves Hicks and Gillett and sadly we’ve got caught up in their nonsense.
Thanks for everything Rick but I hope you soon get to enjoy your sizeable pay-off away from our Club.
I’d like it if someone can shed some more light into Parry’s issues. I’m residing in Dubai, it’s where I lived all my life, so I hardly knew what his problems are usually about. What I used to see was usual rants in forums and blogs, but I wasn’t sure if some or all where true or not. Thanks in Advance!
Dear Jim,
Are you thinking of selling the website?
Just found out ‘The Liverpool Way’ has just been sold to the Hicks’!!! What is going on. It was never the best website but sounds like Hicks is going to try and get his hands on forums and fan chat rooms and a churn out bullshit propaganda to help him out!!!
Shame on Dave Usher the former owner.Hope you made yourself a quick buck!
The Liverpool Way sold out to Hicks? Are you sure Kopite999?
Jim, would welcome your view(s) on this.
Kopite999 » I’ve no intention of selling. I’m 100% committed to getting this fabled storied lustrous–
Sorry, don’t know what came over me there.
Dave Usher’s a great lad, if a little too long-haired for my liking, and I fully support the reasons for his announcement today. The timing was pretty much perfect, perhaps a minute early. It’s a significant date, write the date down in your diary, and always be wary of it in future years.
http://www.liverpoolway.co.uk/forum/news/59289-welcome-our-new-site-owners.html
Hee hee!!
What date is it again )))))))
Look folks…… you’ll know from my past comments that I wholeheartedly agree that Parry and Moores showed an apalling lack of judgment in going with the American pair instead of DIC. I am not suggesting for an instant that we should forget this. However the reality is that Parry and Moores know they made a mistake and are trying their best to rectify this. Right now slagging off Parry and Moores only helps Hicks by diverting precious energy away from getting Hicks out of the Club which should be far and away our no. 1 priority.
Parry and Moores’s apology will keep for later but getting Hicks out of the Club is an urgent priority which will not. Therefore I would urge all my fellow Reds to keep their enery and focus on getting Hicks out and put their feelings about Parry and Moores on the backburner until Hicks is gone. The fact that Hicks regards Parry and Moores as enemies (but in truth how many friends does he have ??) and wants to replace them on the Board with his own lackeys only reinforces my belief that, for the time being at least, we should get behind them and concentrate on getting Hicks out……..and guys please lets not fall into the trap of just shouting "Yanks out" on Wednesday night. This will only enable a grade A bullshitter like Hicks to tell the World that the chants are really directed at his enemy Gillett and not him. Lets leave Mr Hicks in absolutely no doubt who we regard as the major problem in this drama and what we want him to do about it.
We know from Jim’s article (and other sources) that Hicks and his whole 16 member family entourage will be at the Emirates on Wednesday night. We know Hicks fancies himself as a world class PR spin doctor and this is designed to be a show of strength by him but we can turn it to our advantage by giving him a very public and embarrassing humiliation in front of the watching world. Lets put Parry,
When we got drawn against Arsenal in the Champions League this year, i found the interview with Parry on Sky regarding the draw almost cringe-worthy. He admitted it was a draw he and ‘we’ didn’t want, and said it would be tough to progress. This is the kink of message we DON’T need in the club.
In contrast the Arsenal response was a more eager one regarding the tie. Their representative calling the match an ‘exciting challenge’ etc…
Please leave Mr. Parry, take the other 3 Marx bros with you too.
Anfielder » If Parry and Moores got it wrong a year ago, what’s to say they’re not wrong now? What if Parry and Moores are self-serving in this, because under DIC they get their privileges, under Hicks they don’t? I’m not saying that is the case, I’m saying we’ve got to stop assuming as much as we have done in the past. We trusted Moores and Parry 13 months ago, look what happened. We still haven’t really had a satisfactory answer as to why DIC really did walk away last year from having to bid a fraction of the price they would have to find today. Again, before I get accused of it, that’s not defending Hicks. It’s avoiding us running blindly into another mess.
Protests aren’t likely to stop Hicks at the moment, that’s my view. All that will stop him is a lack of money.
And if he wins his fight, what are we going to do? If you woke up tomorrow to be told he’d got the club, Gillett had sold, DIC had conceded defeat, what would you do? It’s only my opinion, but I think we’d have to call a truce, ask for talks, put our requirements forward and see what kind of response it got. I think that would gain us more than any protests.
Is Rick Parry responsible for turning us into a club that uses the word ‘hopefully’ all the time now?
Hopefully this and hopefully that…and gee maybe if the sky doesn’t fall in on us!
What about firm leadership from the top down?
Words like confidence, arrogance, I believe,
must win!
Jim, the answer to your questions should be fairly obvious from my previous comments. I don’t trust Parry and Moores’ judgment at all and I think Parry’s lack of foresight and judgment is a large part of the reason we have fallen so far behind the Mancs during Parry’s stewardship not to mention his appallingly ill-judged decision to go with Hicks in the first place. However my faith in DIC is not (I repeat not) based on Parry’s opinion of them (I don’t even really know or care what Parry thinks of DIC) but on all of the other information I know about DIC and by applying my own independent judgment. For the record I don’t think there is ever much point trying to sit down and reason with someone like Hicks if he thinks he’s in the stronger position. This is for the same reason I wouldn’t do it with Hitler or Stalin. What this all boils down to is that you and I have a very different view of Tom Hicks but I think mine is the one that is supported by the evidence.
Anfielder » Fair enough Anfielder, that was well put.
The evidence against Hicks on the net is compelling, it takes no time at all to find a disgruntled group of employees made redundant but given no pay-off, or failed ventures into other territories than the US and that’s just two off the top of my head.
The problem with the evidence, or some of it, is that it’s not fully there. Some of it has been from old newspaper reports, and although that’s not to say it was all made up, it wasn’t as bad as it was made out to be. That said, this is probably like saying, “He didn’t deliberately burn your house down to the ground, he negligently burned your house, and not down to the ground, but to the point of all your belongings being destroyed and the roof being ruined.” Not as bad – but hardly very good! A lot more evidence I’ve found I’ve actually found it hard to find original sources for it. I seem to remember that I found it hard to find anything relatively independent on the situation with his dealings in Brazil. It would be good if we could find some balanced information on what happened in what I think was a number of years at the helm of two Brazillian clubs, and the media deals tied in with it. Who were his partners and have they been keeping out of similar situations since? One situation where a default on a loan was about to happen with one of his interests was reported in the lead up to it looking like happening, then it went quiet as far as reports are concerned. I later found that it had gone quiet because the default had been avoided when Hicks put his own cash in, it was a bad spell and sorted itself out in the end. I’ll need to dig around for the details, but without using it to defend Hicks, I’m pointing out we need to be careful to not to fall for every negative story we hear about Hicks, or dismiss every positive one. Even then, even ignoring every situation outside of our club, he’s still got a lot of explaining to do about Anfield and what went on.
Trying to reason with him, given the persona he’s shown with those “he pouted” comments and others, does sound like it would be fruitless. I’ve got worries about him digging his heels in over small points because he can, about him acting in anger rather than thinking about what he’s doing. Obviously he’s not going to do anything that would deliberately hurt him financially, but the first thing to be hit when any football club hits financial problems is the playing squad, and in return its chances of success. If someone told him that he was a cheapskate by not chartering a more luxurious plane for the team for European aways, would he charter the most expensive plane on earth to prove the point? A few months and millions later and we’ve got nothing left for transfers.
I think one thing he’s going to have to accept, if he wants any kind of acceptance, is that he personally takes a back seat and stays out of the way after any change in ownership in his favour. He might be better off with one of his sons as the figurehead of LFC from the Hicks family. I can imagine him assuming we’d think that suggested he wasn’t taking us seriously or that we thought he was treating us as a minor interest – but we wouldn’t! In terms of day-to-day running, I don’t want to slag Rick Parry off too much because he’s not a bad person as such, as far as I know, but he’s not the dynamic proactive CEO we need. If it was because Moores used to make him check with him first in the past, and G&H have made him do it now, then fair enough. But I don’t think that’s really been the case. Parry’s trying to save the club now, allegedly, and probably is doing what he thinks is best (because I seriously don’t think he’ll be at the club after takeover regardless of who wins). But had he been on the ball not just at takeover time but throughout the early months of ownership, would we maybe be in a better position? If Rafa hinted at Parry being slow with transfers, was that because there was a hold up from the US, or from Parry, and what did Parry do about it? Anyway, back to what I was saying – we need a top-quality CEO who is given autonomy to act within quite wide-ranging parameters. By all means he can run some decisions by Hicks or his sons if there’s time, but where necessary he should be able to make his own decisions, fast, on the spot, and be trusted by the owner.
A good CEO needs to understand the game, as well as how to make money from us in as many ways as possible without crossing too many lines that supporters, players and any manager would object to crossing.
I understand your stand point, but if Hicks is successful I’d prefer it if we found a way of negotiating with him. Or as I just said, with his sons and a decent CEO. I think leaving him to it, folding our arms and sulking would leave us in the dark and would lead him to caring less and less about what we think. Without Gillett there to interfere in decisions, rightly or wrongly, and without the shadow of DIC hanging over him like vultures waiting to pick up the pieces, we’d have a chance to maybe influence his or his exec team’s thinking.
Whoever wins this battle, we need to make it clear we want to be in the loop, that we’re willing to work with them for the good of the club, as long as it overall for the good of the club.
If Hicks is unwilling to listen then he’ll find himself on the receiving end of some more protests, boycotts, action aimed to make him wish he’d not bothered sitting next to Gillett the first time.
read on (or rather read up) liverpool fans. do you think jim knew hicks letter was coming some time ago? do you think he’s been in cohoots with hick junior for a while now? do you think jim’s been softening us up for a new dynamic CEO to replace Parry? hindsight’s a wonderful thing but read this from jim and maybe just maybe he’s in on more than we thought…
Jim Boardman // Apr 2, 2008 at 5:55 pm
Anfielder » Fair enough Anfielder, that was well put.
The evidence against Hicks on the net is compelling, it takes no time at all to find a disgruntled group of employees made redundant but given no pay-off, or failed ventures into other territories than the US and that’s just two off the top of my head.
The problem with the evidence, or some of it, is that it’s not fully there. Some of it has been from old newspaper reports, and although that’s not to say it was all made up, it wasn’t as bad as it was made out to be. That said, this is probably like saying, “He didn’t deliberately burn your house down to the ground, he negligently burned your house, and not down to the ground, but to the point of all your belongings being destroyed and the roof being ruined.” Not as bad – but hardly very good! A lot more evidence I’ve found I’ve actually found it hard to find original sources for it. I seem to remember that I found it hard to find anything relatively independent on the situation with his dealings in Brazil. It would be good if we could find some balanced information on what happened in what I think was a number of years at the helm of two Brazillian clubs, and the media deals tied in with it. Who were his partners and have they been keeping out of similar situations since? One situation where a default on a loan was about to happen with one of his interests was reported in the lead up to it looking like happening, then it went quiet as far as reports are concerned. I later found that it had gone quiet because the default had been avoided when Hicks put his own cash in, it was a bad spell and sorted itself out in the end. I’ll need to dig around for the details, but without using it to defend Hicks, I’m pointing out we need to be careful to not to fall for every negative story we hear about Hicks, or dismiss every positive one. Even then, even ignoring every situation outside of our club, he’s still got a lot of explaining to do about Anfield and what went on.
Trying to reason with him, given the persona he’s shown with those “he pouted” comments and others, does sound like it would be fruitless. I’ve got worries about him digging his heels in over small points because he can, about him acting in anger rather than thinking about what he’s doing. Obviously he’s not going to do anything that would deliberately hurt him financially, but the first thing to be hit when any football club hits financial problems is the playing squad, and in return its chances of success. If someone told him that he was a cheapskate by not chartering a more luxurious plane for the team for European aways, would he charter the most expensive plane on earth to prove the point? A few months and millions later and we’ve got nothing left for transfers.
I think one thing he’s going to have to accept, if he wants any kind of acceptance, is that he personally takes a back seat and stays out of the way after any change in ownership in his favour. He might be better off with one of his sons as the figurehead of LFC from the Hicks family. I can imagine him assuming we’d think that suggested he wasn’t taking us seriously or that we thought he was treating us as a minor interest – but we wouldn’t! In terms of day-to-day running, I don’t want to slag Rick Parry off too much because he’s not a bad person as such, as far as I know, but he’s not the dynamic proactive CEO we need. If it was because Moores used to make him check with him first in the past, and G&H have made him do it now, then fair enough. But I don’t think that’s really been the case. Parry’s trying to save the club now, allegedly, and probably is doing what he thinks is best (because I seriously don’t think he’ll be at the club after takeover regardless of who wins). But had he been on the ball not just at takeover time but throughout the early months of ownership, would we maybe be in a better position? If Rafa hinted at Parry being slow with transfers, was that because there was a hold up from the US, or from Parry, and what did Parry do about it? Anyway, back to what I was saying – we need a top-quality CEO who is given autonomy to act within quite wide-ranging parameters. By all means he can run some decisions by Hicks or his sons if there’s time, but where necessary he should be able to make his own decisions, fast, on the spot, and be trusted by the owner.
A good CEO needs to understand the game, as well as how to make money from us in as many ways as possible without crossing too many lines that supporters, players and any manager would object to crossing.
I understand your stand point, but if Hicks is successful I’d prefer it if we found a way of negotiating with him. Or as I just said, with his sons and a decent CEO. I think leaving him to it, folding our arms and sulking would leave us in the dark and would lead him to caring less and less about what we think. Without Gillett there to interfere in decisions, rightly or wrongly, and without the shadow of DIC hanging over him like vultures waiting to pick up the pieces, we’d have a chance to maybe influence his or his exec team’s thinking.
Whoever wins this battle, we need to make it clear we want to be in the loop, that we’re willing to work with them for the good of the club, as long as it overall for the good of the club.
If Hicks is unwilling to listen then he’ll find himself on the receiving end of some more protests, boycotts, action aimed to make him wish he’d not bothered sitting next to Gillett the first time.
“read on (or rather read up) liverpool fans. do you think jim knew hicks letter was coming some time ago? do you think he’s been in cohoots with hick junior for a while now? do you think jim’s been softening us up for a new dynamic CEO to replace Parry?”
Would there be anything wrong with any of that if so, midlands?
If he has done more research into the situation and has adjusted his thoughts on the situation accordingly, then that’s a credit to Jim. Live and learn. Only the foolish refuse to ever admit having been in error, especially after they come across new information that challenges their original opinion.
Jim, Midlands-red has a point although I trace the change of subtle emphasis in your articles to the time of the “Delight for Mascherano last new signing of Gillett-Hicks nightmare” dated 29th Feb.
Read the responses, in particular the ones from 9 and kevin callaghan. The latter was a simple anti-Rafa and fair enough but 9’s was something else. If you read the exchanges it seemed that you and he know each other at least you recognised 9 as a lawyer. Your exchange tailed off into a promise off a private exchange of emails.
Probably pure coincidence, but I started then to read a diametrically altered reality in articles as far as Gillett and DIC are concerned and the case for life with Hicks began to come through. Even in the title of this thread there is a swipe at DIC. Where was it said that DIC could not afford LFC’s price? Sameer Al Ansari most certainly did not say that.
Mr. Dawg, it’s all about being open and transparent.
I like the idea of alternative views. It makes one think ‘between the lines’ as Rafa would say.
I just think that Jim needs to come clean(er) on a few things.
As for you Mr. Dawg, how many tickets are you getting for the Chelsea game? And will you be sitting with the Executives
I wonder if Mr. Dawg is Ian Ayres in disguise. We must be told.
Maybe the board need to get rid of Ian Ayres? Or is he actually doing a good job for the club?
By the way, Jim tell us more about your relationship with the Hicks clan – if there is or isn’t one? Have they contacted you? Did they let you in on their intention to let Parry go? Have you tried to contact them? Did you get a response? Would be good to know.