Couldn't help but notice that his Observer article this week seemed a bit familiar though:
Although "league reconstruction" had, improbably, become a more common phrase in Scottish football than "are ye fuckin' blind, ref?" in the previous dozen years, the terms under which the rebels were allowed to depart the SFL would ensure one more transformation.Could it be that it jogged memories of his Scotsman column from a couple of weeks ago?
There was a time when "league reconstruction" was among the most frequently-used phrases in the Scottish vocabulary. It began in the early 1970s and was born of dwindling attendances as the boom years immediately following the Second World War receded into the past and football was challenged for the leisure time of the populace by other diversions.Not a bad gig this journalism lark.
But it's hard not to agree with his conclusion that change doesn't guarantee success - although I suppose the argument could be made that most of the changes to date have been handled with the clumsy incompetence that passes for football administration in Scotland.
He also notes that most SPL managers have never supported the split, a format that exists for financial not footballing reasons.
Where do we go from here? Glenn's assessment - nowhere:
In the event, no change is likely, because the Old Firm's own insistence on an 11-1 majority vote being required on such matters has backfired, with at least four, but more like six, members favouring the status quo.I'd disagree. These clubs have survived for a century or more in a country that really shouldn't be able to sustain them. They adapt to survive. If they are suddenly standing perilously close to the abyss, I think we'll see them bring about change quite soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment