Redwire

It's up now: You're not fit to run our club, blast Liverpool fans Last updated at 22:22pm on 18th January 2008 Comments Comments Tom Hicks and George Gillett will be targeted by angry Liverpool fans on Monday in the first orchestrated show of dissent against their Anfield reign. After weeks of voicing their support for Rafa Benitez, over the mounting threat to his position as Liverpool manager, Anfield followers are about to adopt a different approach by turning their fury on his bosses, Hicks and Gillett. Influential website Reclaim The Kop, who organised the pro-Benitez demonstration prior to the Champions League tie with Porto two months ago, have launched a scathing attack on the Americans and urged a capacity Anfield crowd to follow suit against Aston Villa on Monday night. In a press release, they claimed Hicks and Gillett were 'not fit to be associated with our club' and added that forcing them out might be the only way to save Benitez. 'We allowed ourselves to believe that they had a gut sense of Liverpool's specialness,' it said. 'They gave a good impression of understanding and cherishing The Liverpool Way, but the current situation is unworkable. 'There is a minimum acceptable standard of ownership and Hicks and Gillett have fallen badly short. Rafa, with his ingrained sense of honour, dignity and morality, has been publicly humiliated by them and would have walked away by now but for one small thing the Americans will never get. 'He loves it here. He loves the club, the fans, the city and The Liverpool Way. More than anybody at the club, he is desperate to deliver for us that which we long for so badly. 'They will sack him in the summer. They have left themselves with no other option, so while it gives us no joy to recommend it, we have to drive them out. 'These are critical times for Liverpool FC. If Hicks stays, Rafa goes — simple as that. And if Rafa goes, the empire he is building crumbles. After giving Rafa a vote of no-confidence, he (Hicks) will have to sack him in the summer — unless the owners are not here. We have to give our answer loud and clear, starting on Monday night.' Hicks denied on Thursday that he was considering selling his Anfield stake to Dubai International Capital but he may have second thoughts if vocal backing for Benitez turns into open hostility towards himself and Gillett. Around 2,000 fans responded to a call from Reclaim The Kop in November and marched from a nearby pub to the ground, shouting slogans and carrying banners. The protests were sparked by Benitez's fears that he was about to be ousted and his hold on power has been eroded still further by Hicks' recent admission that he offered the manager's job to Jurgen Klinsmann. Doubts remain about Benitez's ability to survive beyond the end of the season. As he prepared for the Villa game, he insisted unity within the squad was a strong as ever and made light of an apparent refusal by Steven Gerrard and Jamie Carragher to back him publicly. Gerrard shook his head when asked whether Tuesday's 5-0 FA Cup third round replay win was 'for the manager', while Carragher admitted he 'hadn't a clue' whether the 47-year old Spaniard could deliver the main prize of a Barclays Premier League title. 'I am not concerned about that one bit,' said Benitez. 'We have all spoken before about the importance of doing the right thing for the club, not individuals, and they were echoing what I have always believed. 'I have a fantastic relationship with the players, even if I wasn't invited to their Christmas party! The relationship is as good as ever, and Stevie and Carra know I have always supported them strongly.' http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/arti...d=1779&ct=5

Rafael Benitez tries to smile through uncertainty of ownership struggle James Ducker As judgment day looms for Liverpool’s embattled American owners, Rafael BenÍtez attempted to put on a brave face yesterday, the manager insisting that the chaos at the club off the field would only pull him and his players closer together as they seek to bring some relief to concerned supporters. For all his efforts to remain upbeat and toe the party line, however, it still promises to be a critical week for the future of English football’s most successful club. What initially started out as a clash between manager and proprietor has escalated into a battle between the two owners, George Gillett Jr and Tom Hicks, but there were no concrete indications last night as to how this struggle for power at Anfield will play out. One well-placed source at the club suggested that, with Monday a Bank Holiday in the US, it could be “two or three” days yet before the owners’ intentions become clear, with Gillett mulling over whether to support a plan, backed by Dubai International Capital (DIC), to buy out Hicks’s 50 per cent shareholding or throw his weight behind a controversial refinancing package that would strengthen his partner’s hold on the club but weaken his own. It is a situation that is thought to be causing Gillett considerable stress. On the one hand he is understood to have serious misgivings about his continued involvement with Hicks, who has proved anything but the silent partner he hoped for when he brought the Texan on board to help to secure their takeover of the club in February last year, not least when admitting this I week that he had talked to Jürgen Klinsmann about succeeding BenÍtez before the former Germany coach took charge at Bayern Munich. If he reluctantly commits to the £350 million refinancing package that Hicks has been pushing hard for, Gillett knows that they will be committed to working together, despite a growing acceptance that their long-term relationship is untenable. On the other hand, Gillett cannot be sure how Hicks will react if he uses the financial clout of DIC, the private equity arm of Dubai that was gazumped by the Americans in their bid to purchase Liverpool last year, to attempt to buy out his partner’s stake. Insiders said last night that they were “in the dark” as to whether Hicks would be willing to sell, although if his spokesman’s remarks on Thursday were anything to go by, he will not be doing so. Equally, even if a favourable offer is put to him by Gillett – and there remains only a “10 to 15 per cent” chance of that happening, according to sources – Hicks may take exception to his partner aligning himself with DIC and attempt to drive up the price of his shareholding or lodge a counter offer. With the £350 million loan that would allow the Americans to repay money borrowed from their takeover and begin work on a new 70,000-seat stadium in Stanley Park expected to be in place early next week, however, the only thing that is clear is that Gillett has little time to decide what to do. Either he signs the terms of the loan on offer and effectively bows to Hicks, or he goes with DIC and hopes that Hicks reacts positively. Whatever the outcome, the futures of many at Anfield are likely to be in doubt. BenÍtez has next to no support from Hicks and Gillett, but the manager is unlikely to be much better off in the event that DIC comes on board, with the Arab-run consortium known to favour the appointment of its own man. Likewise, Rick Parry, the Liverpool chief executive, who has come in for some fierce criticism for agreeing to the Americans’ takeover, may also be under threat. At least BenÍtez retains the loyalty of his players and the fans. “When you play well, I think it shows the team spirit is much better and the confidence of the players is higher,” BenÍtez said. “It’s easier when you are winning, so we need to win some games in a row and everything will be much better.” http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/foo...icle3213150.ece

Liverpool ponder move to buy out Hicks Gillett considers a future without his co-owner Americans fall out over plans for re-financing Andy Hunter Friday January 18, 2008 The Guardian Liverpool's co-owner George Gillett will spend the next few days deciding whether to support a plan to buy out his partner Tom Hicks or throw his weight behind a refinancing package that would strengthen Hicks's hold on the club. Gillett and his co-chairman Hicks have almost finalised terms on a £350m loan that would allow them to repay money borrowed for their £218.9m takeover, repay loans acquired to sign players last summer and commence work on their revised plans for a new stadium. The deal, with the Royal Bank of Scotland and US investment firm Wachovia, could be completed early next week providing the two Americans sign the terms on offer. After a period of instability unprecedented in Liverpool's recent history, Gillett is understood to have grave misgivings over his continued involvement with Hicks, the man he brought on board to secure the takeover last February but who has proved far from the silent partner he originally envisaged. A fresh dilemma for Gillett is that Dubai International Capital, the investment arm of the Dubai government, is now prepared to provide him with the financial backing to make an offer for Hicks's 50% stake in Liverpool. DIC lost out in the pursuit of the former chairman David Moores' majority shareholding last February when its failure to meet agreed deadlines for the takeover enabled the Americans to succeed with a late and more lucrative bid. Though it withdrew acrimoniously from negotiations DIC has maintained its interest and, having baulked at a £150m asking price for a 15% stake last October, Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid al-Maktoum's investment company now hopes to capitalise on the disunity in the hierarchy. DIC is willing to join forces with Gillett in an attempt to persuade Hicks to sell his interest in Liverpool for a substantial profit. A source confirmed yesterday that a deal has been drawn up in principle and will be presented to the Americans before they put their signatures to the £350m loan. "It is a very delicate situation but DIC has reignited its interest," said the source. "The terms of the offer, which will be made to Tom Hicks, have been agreed and DIC are hopeful they will be finally be able to invest in Liverpool." Major obstacles remain in the way of DIC gaining a financial interest in Liverpool, however, not least Hicks's insistence that he has no intention of selling up. There is also doubt over Gillett's determination to attempt to oust his business partner by agreeing terms with DIC. Gillett and Hicks both have an option to purchase the other's stake in Liverpool, although the former would require backing from Dubai to achieve that goal. Hicks, owner of the Texas Rangers baseball franchise and the Dallas Stars ice hockey team, created further problems for the American regime this week with the revelation that both he and Gillett, owner of the Montreal Canadiens ice hockey franchise, had approached Jürgen Klinsmann last November as "an insurance policy" against the possible departure of the Liverpool manager, Rafael Benítez. What was an attempt by the Texan to draw a line under the uncertainty surrounding the future of Benítez has proved hugely embarrassing for Gillett, who is disturbed by the furious reaction among Liverpool supporters it provoked, but it is how much of the £350m loan should be placed on to the club's books that is the fundamental problem. Both Moores, who became honorary life president of Liverpool under the terms of the takeover, and the chief executive, Rick Parry, have blocked attempts to load all of the debt on to the club amid concerns at annual interest payments of £30m. Under the terms of the loan it is anticipated half will be burdened on the club and the rest secured against Kop Holdings, Gillett and Hicks's parent company, although that still represents a U-turn on their promise to use their own funds and not to adopt the Glazers' handling of Manchester United. The Americans will still require a further £300m loan at a later date to complete work on a proposed new stadium. Gillett could exert pressure on Hicks to sell next week by refusing to commit to the refinancing package. Should Gillett agree to the loan, and sources yesterday insisted that he remains undecided, then Hicks - the driving force behind the stadium and the biggest threat to Benítez - will be empowered in his plans to bring the development to fruition in 2011 when he can demand a higher price for his stake. http://football.guardian.co.uk/News_Story/0,,2242805,00.html

Another not too flattering article on Hicks and his sports teams: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa38...207/ai_n9134756

This content is not viewable to guests.

This content is not viewable to guests.

How come Gillett gets let off this? He too offered Klinsmann Rafa's job.

I think we should all boycott the game to show our disgust at Hicks and Gillett.

2-0 now.

This content is not viewable to guests.

I think this one is the most appropriate

Gerrard Babel Pennant

And here is an example of why it's pointless debating anything with this idiot.

The team desperately needs a centre back now so that's no demonstration of backing Rafa at all.

This content is not viewable to guests.

I think that as more has come out about what has been going on it has become clearer that it was anything but childish. It was a clear strategic move by Rafa.

Nice bit from Blackwell: "If those reports are accurate, Rafa is a dead man walking, and I don't think he will like that feeling," Blackwell said. "The game of football at the moment, for me, has lost all credibility in how the business of the game should be run. When you think of what Rafa has done for Liverpool, it seems incredible to me that someone has had the cheek to go behind his back and speak to someone else about his job. It's a disgrace. If you have the morals of alleycats in the boardroom, how can you expect players to be the virtuous role models we expect them to be on and off the pitch?" http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/pr...icle3339107.ece

Lawton's take on it all: http://sport.independent.co.uk/football/co...icle3339096.ece

I hope Johnson is getting well paid for this as he's making a complete prick of himself.

I'm up for it. Anyone got a big van?

Yes, just another lie to add to the list.

This content is not viewable to guests.

They were definitely releasing misleading figures last season. I don't know whether the same policy still applies. http://football.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/...2013452,00.html

This content is not viewable to guests.

Why would it have to be either or?