I honestly dont think it needed to end the way it did in 1892. It's clear Houlding was conciliatory toward those on the Everton Committee looking to avoid higher rental payments. Orrell looking for rent from his patch of adjoining land was the problem - a chancer who struck whilst the iron was hot. Houlding was fully entitled to what he was claiming. There was ambitious people on the Everton committee, though, who were absolutely determined to break away from Houlding and that was the agenda rather than financial exploitation. The smart thing for our committee to have done back in 1892 would have been to pay Orrell, stay put at Anfield and wait Houlding out - eventually paying him (or his family) the £6,000 the land was valued at (instead of the £8,000+ paid to set Goodison up). The reasdon why Houlding and Liverpool took off so soon after they set up was that the ground was a traditional football venue with good access and retained all the old fixtures and fittings. Purchase a new team and they were off and running. We should have given no room for a competitor on our doorstep.
Hindisght's a wonderful thing, I know, but the men who broke Everton away from Anfield and moved the club to Goodison are usually touted as visionaries, so criticism is acceptable. There should never have been a Liverpool FC.
