Lions previews
Reaction to sale

ATHLETIC (from): Kelly, Adams, Holt, S McNiven, Hotte, Graham, Duxbury, Sheridan, Rickers, Allott, Dudley, Miskelly, Futcher, Innes, Tipton, Whitehall. In-form Millwall may be unchanged from their weekend victory at Scunthorpe. 

MILLWALL (from): Warner, Nethercott, Fitzgerald, Ryan, Neill, Reid, Ifill, Bircham, Cahill, Sadlier, Harris, Dolan, Bowry, Gilkes, Spink, Livermore, Moody, Shaw. 

Revival run put to the biggest test

THERE is a danger that tonight’s visit of play-off chasing Millwall will be overshadowed by events off the field. No-one should be deceived, however, for this is arguably the most significant match of the season so far. After one defeat in six league games, Athletic are in 16th place — their highest position since September of last season. They are doing a passable impression of a team on the up, but consistency takes a long time to develop and their home form remains a worry. That is why tonight’s fixture will speak volumes about Athletic’s prospects — it is a litmus test of whether they can break out of a bad habit and continue to progress with promise. They could have few tougher opponents than Millwall, who have won each of their last three away league games, culminating in a 4-1 hammering of Scunthorpe. The performance on Saturday was, by all accounts, their best of the season so far, providing evidence that the joint managership of Alan McCleary and Keith Stevens is beginning to work well.

Despite signing four players during the summer, Millwall are leaning heavily on the men who took them to 10th place last time round. Former Liverpool goalkeeper Tony Warner — a dead ringer for David James — is the only new recruit likely to start tonight’s match. Striker Paul Moody has been something of a disappointment since his £150,000 move from Fulham, while ex-Reading winger Michael Gilkes will probably be on the bench and injuries have so far prevented defender Sean Dyche from making an appearance since his arrival from Bristol City.

Brierley fends off takeover critics

"Mr Brierley and his colleagues were members of an embarrassingly passive board. "They allowed a silent major shareholder and a chairman (Ian Stott) with ambitions within the FA to pursue their own agendas while the club limped down the divisions from a position of great opportunity and strength." But Mr Brierley insisted that he and his fellow investors had stepped in because no other buyer was forthcoming. 

He said: "If a multi-millionaire had come along, we would have welcomed it and gone along with everything big money entails. "We are as frustrated as the fans that no such person has appeared. "I think the majority of fans will realise that hands-on stability is in the interests of the club and is now in place. "Some may be disappointed that a Jack Walker figure hasn't arrived, but we felt that something needed to be done. That's why we stepped in." 

Deal for stability better than no deal at all

THE sale of JW Lees’ stake in Athletic this week was the end of an era — but it will be a big disappointment to anyone expecting a cash-laden new beginning. Such deals are often greeted with dramatic outpourings or sweeping gestures. Pledges are made that the club, regardless of its size, will be soon be tripping over silverware. The takeover of Athletic is a much more low-key affair, a shift in the balance of power from Middleton Junction to the Boundary Park boardroom. It will neither provide money for players nor have any material effect, other than to keep the running of the club entirely in-house. For David Brierley, Derek Taylor and Peter Chadwick, stability is the buzzword. They have bought 47.3 per cent of the club in equal shares and, stressing all the while that none of them has a bottomless pit of money, they are aiming to maintain the status quo. The board will remain unchanged, with Mr Brierley as chairman, Ian Stott as his number two and Mr Taylor, Mr Chadwick, John Slevin, Norman Holden and Geoffrey Butterworth completing the long-established structure. Interestingly, the official press release stressed that this need not spell the end for other interested parties. “It doesn’t rule out any opportunity for another individual to make us an offer,” the statement said — words suggesting that the trio see themselves as guardians of the club, rather than its future for generations to come. Mr Brierley was also keen to ensure that no-one got the wrong impression about their intentions.

Among his comments were: “We are not Jack Walkers”; “We are not millionaires”; “The youth policy is the way forward”; “I don’t believe in throwing money at a problem” and, summing up, “We will not be investing in the club”. It is one thing to play down a high-profile transaction, but this manifesto has the potential for deep repercussions. The stance taken by Mr Brierley and his fellow investors is nothing if not honest. It is far better than a half-hearted promise that there may or may not be a few quid to spend . . . once things have calmed down . . . sometime soon . . . sometime never . . . perhaps . . . perhaps not . . . For that lack of hype and hyperbole, they should be applauded. It will not, however, placate members of pressure group Stop The Rot or other fans — and there are more, I suspect, than they realise — who were demanding more drastic change at the top. Those people will see the same faces wielding greater power and providing no more money than the much-maligned brewery itself. But this does look a small step in the right direction, albeit a qualified one with benefits which seem largely short-term. For, while Athletic will always be a selling club unless serious money is pumped in, it is better to have a hand on the tiller than to drift along as a business with for-sale signs which are fraying at the edges. JW Lees put their stake on the market over four months ago and didn’t receive a similar “acceptable offer” despite interest from four other individuals or consortia. It had become clear that the hoped-for “Sugar Daddy” was not going to appear — making it a case of either this deal or no deal at all. Moreover, it always seemed incongruous that the board should own no more than ten per cent of the shares between seven of them. Now that Messrs Brierley, Taylor and Chadwick have stepped up their interest, the men who run the club can finally be held accountable whether things go right or wrong. The harsh truth is that Athletic, despite being on the verge of a £2million windfall from the sale of Boundary Park, will continue to lose money hand over fist. While many will feel let down, it should be remembered that a club stuck in limbo is a club heading nowhere fast. And no-one should reject the idea of the shares being moved on again if Athletic continue to improve on the pitch.

Mr Brierley’s stated aim is, at the very least, survival this year and promotion next. If Andy Ritchie can raise the club from this extremely average division, wealthy outsiders will begin to see a far more attractive proposition — especially if there is a brand-new stadium to come. That could lead to a revival in interest and, of course, the new men at the top have already shown a willingness to pass on the torch. This is business, not an exercise in philanthropy. Everything has its price. For now, however, the hope is that Athletic can emerge stronger from a turbulent period in their history. This deal is far from the answer to their prayers, but it had reached the stage where anything was better than nothing.

Best is yet to come says Dudley