The domestic football season may be over, but, in a city which can be unhealthily obsessed by the sport, discussion continues well into the summer months. The normal close season routine of speculating on transfers involving both clubs is now accompanied by the debate about the new stadia proposed for Liverpool & Everton.
So much uncertainty surrounds both (for what it's worth, my hunch is that Everton's proposed move to Kirkby will be kicked into the long grass & Liverpool's Stanley Park stadium is far from a done deal, despite the official noises).
The question of a shared stadium has been mooted for at least 30 years. Proponents of a common home have long pointed to San Siro in Milan as proof that a partisan atmosphere need not be sacrificed as part of such a move. Debate on the issue was placed in a greatly altered context after Hillsborough.
Given the uncertainty concerning both clubs, the leaders of Liverpool City Council have revived the shared stadium issue (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2008/may/28/1 ).
The Guardian's report observes, "Warren Bradley, leader of the ruling Liberal Democrat party and an Everton season-ticket holder, has insisted a shared stadium remains a possibility despite fierce opposition from fans and, crucially, the two clubs."
It's difficult to see where there are grounds for Bradley's optimism. I agree that it would make sense, economically, for the two clubs to share their resources. However, cold economic thinking is rarely a factor with both sets of fans. Additionally, the debate has not so much moved on as been changed; neither Liverpool nor Everton will move into new homes for the forseeable future. In this changed context, the unspoken belief is that both are drawing up plans to renovate or redevelop Anfield & Goodison Park respectively.