The guy at Madrid is apparently the king
But itâs going to end up being the standard posturing to ensure that UEFA understand who really does hold all the cards
Yeah I'm not too clued up on it, to be honest, mate.
This is what I was getting that from - from October, when the news first broke.
Simon Hughes does not chat sh*t, by the way. At all.
Is it time for John W Henry to once again emerge from the shadows?
By Simon Hughes Oct 12, 2020 94
August 2017 was a busy month for John W Henry. Rarely does he get involved in the front-desk business of the football club he owns but Philippe Coutinho was demanding to leave Liverpool and he did not want that to happen, even if manager JĂźrgen Klopp was comfortable with it.
Four summers earlier, Henry had intervened when Luis Suarez tried to force an exit by stamping his feet, only for Henry to realise he had bigger shoes and this allowed him to stamp a little harder. Though Suarez only stayed for another season and Coutinho stuck around for five months or so, on both occasions Henry was able to reduce criticism that stemmed from a lack of success on the pitch and redirect the mood on Merseyside by his words as well as his actions.
While the situation with Coutinho bubbled away across the Atlantic, at his home in the Boston suburb of Brookline, Henry was entertaining guests along with Tom Werner, the Liverpool chairman whoâd flown in from Los Angeles. The pair were also at work, canvassing opinions. Sitting in front of them at the dining table was Rick Parry. Earlier that day, they had met at the offices of the Boston Globe, which Henry was very proud of owning.
Parry was there because there had been an idea rattling about in the back of Henryâs mind almost from the moment he became interested in Liverpool. Yet he realised it wasnât something he could act upon by all by himself or even with the support of Joel Glazer, whose family control Manchester United.
Henry called Parry and invited him to Boston for a second time. Their first meeting had been five or six years earlier, back when Henry was in the process of educating himself about the new sporting pond in which he was swimming. He had not long bought Liverpool when he watched a documentary about the formation of the Premier League, noticing how heavily Parry had been involved.
In the summer of 1992, following months of disagreement, Parry had helped chairmen reach a consensus when he had the sense to formalise the agreement on a single piece of Ernst & Young business paper before every person left the room. A simple eight-point constitution became the basis of the organisationâs startling financial success. Given that heâd subsequently acted as Liverpoolâs chief executive for the best part of a decade, leaving before Fenway Sports Groupâs takeover at Anfield, it was a logical move by Henry to identify Parry as a person to lean on for guidance.
Henry had taken a back seat at Liverpool as early as 2013, having switched his focus to the running of the Globe, after which point heâd ceded the day-to-day affairs to his business partner and Brookline neighbour Mike Gordon. But there were still things about the club he owned and the gameâs governance, particularly, that sent his thoughts racing. By 2017, it was frustrating him that Huddersfield Town had as much say when it came to Premier League matters as Liverpool and Manchester United even though the Yorkshire club had only just joined the division for the first time and had done little, if anything at all, to build the competitionâs reputation.
âProject Big Pictureâ did not have a name but it was already an idea in document form, albeit one that needed further consideration and development. Crucially, though, it would require a swell of backing from leading figures outside Henryâs own club if it were to ever have a chance of it being implemented.
The last time Henry went out looking for backing on a significant issue, any progress was undermined by subsequent comments made by someone else representing his own club. In 2011, Henry had thought about the chances of changing the rules so that Premier League clubs could broker their own TV deals abroad but he was nervous about discussing such a reform openly, particularly when he did not have a relationship with any of the non-American owners.
He was advised then by Parry and other figures with top-level experience of English football that the smaller clubs had traditionally listened to the bigger ones; that even if he should expect regular disagreements, it was better to have an open dialogue with competitors than a closed one.
A dinner with Bolton Wanderersâ Phil Gartside went surprisingly well but the line of communication died when Ian Ayre, Liverpoolâs managing director, suggested a few weeks later that fans in Malaysia watching Premier League games on television were not bothered about the fortunes of Gartsideâs club. Including Ayre, Liverpool have had six different figureheads attending Premier League meetings across the last 10 years and this cannot have helped the club establish its voice in a crowded room where the faces of those sitting on the same table have changed a lot as well.
Parry had left Boston in 2017 intrigued by some of Henryâs ideas and concluded that even if there would be a need for compromise should the proposals ever be made public, the plan was a reasonable starting point for any discussion relating to major changes at every level of professional football.
Correspondence between the pair, however, did not exactly accelerate over the months that followed. Henry has always been a distant sort of figure and those who have dealt with him share similar stories when asked to describe his approach to issues he cares about, initially with such zeal you might think the world is ending before a protracted silence that leaves you wondering why he bothered initiating contact in the first place.
It might improve Henryâs chances of succeeding on this occasion if â like with Suarez particularly â he stepped out from the shadows and articulated his vision because, well, it is his plan and heâs spent years working on it, so he must believe in it passionately.
Hiding from your own idea when that very plan could provoke some of the most profound changes English football has ever seen has understandably led many to conclude that it is just another move by a faceless businessman from far away whose only interest is wealth creation.
For the time being, the focus has fallen entirely on Parry because he is the only one speaking, but why wouldnât he talk when he is in a position of responsibility and there is no alternative deal on the table? This one, after all, has the potential to secure the futures of so many endangered clubs under his watch at an extraordinary time.
His involvement should not be viewed as a surprise and nor should his enthusiasm for it to happen. In March, he had told BBC Radio Five Live that he was ânot a fan of begging-bowl cultureâ, and stressed that he didnât want clubs outside of the Premier League to be at the mercy of handouts forever. âI think itâs much better, in dialogue with the Premier League, to talk about sustainable futures and how we might be able to have a reset.â
Parry initially impressed the EFL board last summer during interviews because he promised to open doors to boardrooms at higher levels that had long been considered closed. Yet his reach is now being treated with some suspicion and that is partly because of the silence from other central figures.
Sources at Manchester United have directed attention towards Liverpool since Sunday, but Liverpool are pointing the questions back at Parry. It is ultimately Henry and Glazerâs story to own and it needs to be taken control of to give the conversation around it a sense of balance and direction. It would be a shock if Glazer chose to follow such a path but Henry should remember it has worked for him in the past.
The Athletic
