Liverpool and Man United owners must face Project Big Picture critics after leaving Rick Parry as scapegoat

Rick Parry has become the face of Project Big Picture. The EFL chairman has been pilloried by opponents of the plan to restructure the finances of English football and has taken the flak head-on.

The 65-year-old has been doing the rounds of the media robustly defending the proposal.

Parry, the inaugural chairman of the Premier League in 1992, had significant input into the Revitalisation document that suggests sweeping changes to the politics and economy of the sport. The prime movers of the initiative, however, are John W Henry and Joel Glazer. Both have been conspicuous by their absence from public debate.

Liverpool’s principal owner Henry is the guiding force of Project Big Picture. The inequalities of the national game and the knock-on effect on the most successful clubs has bothered him for a long time. He has been talking about giving lower league clubs 25 per cent of Premier League revenue since at least 2012.

Make no mistake, this is nothing to do with the goodness of Henry’s heart. He thinks the restructure would benefit his club on a number of levels, ultimately creating the opportunity for more success, particularly in Europe. And more profits.

Glazer, too, has been won round to this way of thinking. It is surreal to imagine the Manchester United co-owner flying the flag for the pyramid but the 49-year-old did just that in a pitch to Big Six executives.

United and Liverpool have great authority in the sport and not just on these shores. They are two of the world’s biggest clubs – only Barcelona and Real Madrid are truly comparable. So why are Glazer and Henry skulking in the States while Parry is doing the heavy lifting this side of the Atlantic? If Project Big Picture is to have any chance of being implemented, its most powerful backers need to make the case to any naysayers.

It might have been prudent for Henry to have attended today's potentially fractious Premier League meeting. Instead, Liverpool will send Billy Hogan, the chief commercial officer. The document came into the public domain via a leak. Allowing thay to happen was a mistake.

Advisors to Henry and Glazer had tried to get them to set the agenda on their terms. It was suggested that they should conduct a high-profile interview, not with the football media but on a big-hitting political programme. The Andrew Marr show on the BBC was mentioned as a possible platform. The logic was that this story transcends sports. It is of national interest.

Both American owners are notoriously camera shy. They are happy to exert their influence in closed discussions but this sort of radical scheme needs the approval of a wider audience and serious scrutiny. Henry and Glazer have many questions to answer. Supporters deserve to hear their rationale first-hand.

The government and fans’ groups have already talked in terms of “backroom dealing” and fears of a behind-closed-doors carve-up are widespread. The way the Glazers bought Old Trafford and then loaded debt onto the club means that United’s owners are regarded as untrustworthy. Henry’s reputation is considerably better but there is natural scepticism when a man whose football experience extends to a mere 10 years starts to explain to the game’s founding nation how the sport should work.

Parry does not care that he is the object of anger, derision and suspicion. He was Liverpool’s chief executive during the troubled ownership of George Gillett and Tom Hicks and is no stranger to being scapegoated. The only thing he is concerned about is what’s best for the EFL’s clubs.

The plan has massive backing among the lower-division clubs. Nigel Travis, Leyton Orient’s chairman, yesterday said there was “no alternative.” Peter Ridsdale, who advises Preston North End, said: “I see there are calls for Rick to resign. I’ve never heard such nonsense.”

Winning over EFL clubs that face oblivion as Covid-19 tightens its grip again is easy. The wider world needs convincing.

Ultimately only Henry and Glazer can do this. They need to engage in the debate. It is not enough to drop a document and walk away, leaving everyone else to row about the consequences. The authors of this agenda need to front up and face their critics.

Almost everyone agrees that some action needs to be taken to protect the pyramid. There are widely differing view about what is required. This is just the start of the battle for the soul of the game. Henry and Glazer cannot sit on the sidelines waiting to see what happens. This is their manifesto. They need to own it.