GEORGE GILLETT issued a belligerent response to Tom Hicks's request to sell his 50 per cent stake in Liverpool last night when he vowed to prevent the Texan taking majority control and accused him of destabilising the club's Champions League campaign.
In another demonstration of support for Rick Parry, who is at loggerheads with Hicks and the manager, Rafael Benitez, Gillett dismissed Hicks's latest request for the chief executive's resignation and urged his co-chairman to cease the public criticism that quickly overshadowed Liverpool's progress into the Champions League semi-finals.
Reiterating his own desire not to sell even one per cent of his shareholding to Hicks, a position that will extend the ownership saga for the foreseeable future, he claimed his rival had avoided airing his concerns at boardroom level owing to a lack of support for his aims for the club.
Responding to a television interview with Hicks aired yesterday, Gillett said: "I am saddened at this latest outburst from Tom Hicks. If Tom wanted a serious discussion on the issues to help the club move forward, he should bring his views to the board and not to Sky Sports.
"Here we are, a few days away from a vital Champions League semi-final match and Tom has once again created turmoil with his public comments. Tom should stop. He knows that Rick Parry has my support and that airing his comments in this way will not change my position. His failure to discuss this with the board or the management committee is significant."
As the tit-for-tat row continued, Gillett also poured scorn on Hicks's version of events regarding the approach to Jurgen Klinsmann and claims he could buy Gillett out and build a new stadium while easing the debt on Liverpool's books. "I was also taken aback by his version of the events as reported," he added. "Tom needs to understand that I will not sell my shares to him and that we need to find a way forward that is properly funded and truly in the best interests of Liverpool. The real business of winning matches and running and developing the club is what we should all be focused on at this moment."
He spoke out after Hicks repeated his call for Parry to resign, labelling his tenure "a disaster", and warned the boardroom paralysis would continue unless his co-owner sold at least one per cent of his 50 per cent share in Liverpool. "If George doesn't sell - because I am not going to sell - I guess we stay in this position that we are in," the Texan said. "It's complicated but it's going to happen, although I can't force George to accept."
Despite declaring he would award Benitez a 12-month contract extension should he gain majority control, a deal that would prolong the manager's stay until 2011, and leave Liverpool with only a working capital debt, currently estimated at £45 million, Hicks's olive branch was unanimously rejected by supporters.
James McKenna, spokesperson for the Spirit of Shankly group, said: "Hicks says we should have had a new stadium and Parry hasn't delivered one. Well, Hicks promised a spade in the ground inside 60 days. One year later we are still waiting. He still hasn't secured the money. He has led us up the garden path again and again. Why should any statement from him have any credibility?"
The current stand-off also has serious implications for the wider Anfield area. The proposed 71,000-seater stadium on Stanley Park is the centrepiece of a regeneration project that is heavily dependent on European funding, and the local MP Peter Kilfoyle has asked the British Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, Andy Burnham, for government intervention.
In a letter to Burnham, Kilfoyle wrote: "Large sums dedicated to regeneration projects in the neighbourhood of the club are contingent on the development of their proposed new stadium.
"That appears to be as distant a prospect as ever. I write to ask you to intervene. Alternatively, can you tell me what powers the Football Association and the Premier League have, in bringing Mr Hicks into line."
Guardian Service
