SFL to patch up Rangers

With Rangers entry into Division Three now all but confirmed, football shirt expert Steven Dow takes a look at an unexpected consequence - and identifies some winners - from Scottish football's summer of uncertainty:

On the face of it, they are just two thin pieces of material that heat seal onto a football shirt. No great shakes and barely noticed beyond the confines of the normally elusive Scottish Football League coverage seen in Scotland.

But now (and I won’t go into the details) the team formerly known as Rangers and all that sail with them have just docked in Division 3 of the SFL and the Irn Bru sleeve patch has just taken off.

Not all that long ago we didn’t have sponsors on football shirts but the financial demands soon saw to that and a further addition to the corporate hold on football was the league sleeve patch. At every senior level of the game it is commonplace to see the league sponsor’s name in some form on the sleeve of each team at home or abroad.

Whether it’s global brands such as Coca Cola or Barclays, they all strive for maximum coverage and it’s no different for Scotland’s very own Barr’s Irn Bru. The difference here is that Irn Bru just struck gold!

The sudden arrival of Ranger’s into Division Three will mean a huge surge of interest in the league and pictures that formerly showed the silver and red Clydesdale Bank logo on the sleeve of the blue shirt will be replaced by the vivid blue and orange of Irn Bru.

For a retailer such as us demand for the sleeve patches has surged. The irony that the colours of the new sleeve patch sit perfectly with Govan’s finest is not lost on anyone and this will also feed the demand. Irn Bru's owners AG Barr will be delighted with the extra coverage that they will receive globally, tempered only by the fact that this is the last season of their current sponsorship deal.

I certainly hope the kitman didn’t jump the gun in May and start applying the Clydesdale patches to the various Rangers kits in the Ibrox dressing room. I can assure you that those bad boys don’t come off if properly applied.

So it’s the fizzy pop patches for Rangers now along with official SFL numbers. Names on the back of the shirt? That’s also a thing of the past. Due to the tighter finances at the lower end of the senior game in Scotland, it’s one set of shirts numbered 1-16, no names and a few spare shirts in case of a laundry accident.

All change but not for the worse, every cloud has a silver lining and the demand for authentic Rangers shirts adorned with the correct personalisation will certainly mean good business for Barr’s Irn Bru and, of course, forward thinking independent football retailers.

Steven Dow is the co-owner of Football Nation, an independent football retailer based in Edinburgh and online at www.thefootballnation.co.uk

Scottish football: Destiny delayed?

The time has finally come for Scottish football to greet the future.

What should happen when the Scottish Football League clubs meet at Hampden today?

Problems and issues should be fully discussed. Threats made by other bodies should be retracted. Fears over the sustainability of the current incarnation of the newco Rangers should be allayed.

Any lingering ambiguity on the resolutions laid in front of the clubs should be resolved.

When the votes are counted Rangers newco should be free to start life in Division Three.

That should be an end to it. For better or for worse we'll all need to embrace what that means for the future.

Scottish football will need to be proactive, people in positions of influence will need to overcome the fear that has undermined the game these last few weeks and be brave, inventive and resilient.

That shouldn't be too much to ask. With the power of being a "guardian" of the game comes the responsibility of building a sustainable model for everyone involved in the game.

Plans for reconstruction should be put in place. Those plans should be borne from rational, constructive discussion rather than panic and self-interest.

The SPL experiment - a 14 year exercise in greed, delusion and failure - should be disbanded.

The governance of the game - the governance that allowed cowardice to leave the SFL clubs with this decision and then allowed bullying and threats to try and influence that decision - should be revolutionised.

The new business model, whatever hardships it might bring, must involve all clubs in all divisions. We've tried thinking only about the elite. It's ended in debt, anger on the terraces and a whopping corporate collapse.

The fans who have shown commendable passion - whatever some might think of their motives - should be engaged, not disregarded as an inconvenient revenue stream.

That's what should happen.

It probably won't though.

The last few days have had the feel of a bizarre list of classified results as clubs hailing from what Jonathan Meades called "football pools towns" have declared their voting intentions.

There has been an avalanche of statements favouring the Division Three option. It says much for the unpredictability of recent events that I'm far from convinced the actual votes will be cast quite as decisively as that.

I'm tired and weary of the whole thing now. But am I alone in thinking that today is just another staging post, another day labelled historic that probably won't resolve very much at all?

Whatever happens it's unlikely that the uncertainty, the vitriol, the self-immolation of the last few weeks will end.

Expect the interchangeable malevolent cop-incompetent cop double act of the SPL's Neil Doncaster and the SFA's Stewart Regan to continue.

Expect this grubby chapter in the history of both those organisations to continue.

Expect SPL chairmen, silently hiding behind the contrived integrity of their "no to newco" vote, to continue to exert influence in the search for the outcome they want.

Expect them to pretend these are principled actions, the actions of men who know that the only way to save the game is to save the fans of all clubs from themselves.

Expect their very vocal supporters to champion them as the real heroes, the brave few doing their best to protect football from the wishes of the majority.

Expect them to ignore their own failings and the remarkable failure of the last 14 years, an intolerable status quo that they are determined to preserve even as they try and cover the unmentionables behind a fig leaf of "positive change."

Expect all that and more.

Expect to be enraged over and over again.

Expect this miserable story to run for a few more days or weeks yet, with a little more of what Scottish football should mean to fans dying with every hour.

But don't expect Regan, Doncaster or their organ grinders to meekly accept the outcome of today's meeting at Hampden if it doesn't end with the result they want.

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers newco: Berwick say Division 3

And yet another statement.

Many clubs have embraced verbosity. Not so Berwick.

Less than 100 words.

The crucial line: "directly into SFL Division Three."

Berwick Rangers Board tonight agreed unanimously that should the new Rangers FC be admitted to the SFL for the new season, that they would support a move directly into SFL Division Three. The Club has also taken on board the feelings of their Supporters Club, Supporters Trust and the countless individual fans who have contacted them directly. There will be no further statement from the club on this matter.

From www.berwickrangersfc.co.uk

STV Sport has the latest on declared voting intentions

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers newco: Clyde comment

Devoid as we are of international success it might be heartening that Scottish football is now head and shoulders above any other country when it comes to releasing statements.

Today it was the turn of Clyde.

Quite explosive this one. It seems to nail as hollow some of the threats that have been made, it questions the continued silence of most SPL clubs and draws attention once more to the uncertainty that still surrounds the Charles Green owned Rangers newco.

And it also suggests - perhaps more explicitly than any other club statement - that based on the information so far provided to the SFL the Rangers newco should not actually be admitted at any level.

It certainly seems to me that, whatever the outcome on Friday, it is going to be difficult for Scottish football to keep either Neil Doncaster or Stewart Regan in positions of such influence.

The board of Clyde Football Club met last night to consider how it might approach the resolutions (see below) to be voted on at the SFL meeting on Friday 13th July. This update is to inform our owners and supporters and hopefully explain some of the complexities that face the club when carefully and objectively considering how we might vote. We hope that by being as clear as possible about the difficulties surrounding this situation that the people able to support the process act swiftly to do so.

The overwhelming reality is that we are being asked to make one of the most important decisions for Scottish Football in a vacuum devoid of factual information, that vacuum having been filled with unhelpful rhetoric and scaremongering by the chief executives of the SFA and SPL.

We therefore looked at what we were being asked to vote on, how it fitted with the principles of the sport, and what information we might need to inform a logical decision in context of the current reality.

It was clear that the resolutions marked a clear departure from all previous process and custom and practice when considering admitting a team to the SFL, albeit operating within the rules of the SFL. It was in that context which we considered the resolutions. In reality, the customary principles of sport were not at the forefront of the resolutions.

We first concluded that there was limited risk to the SFL from the 'Armageddon' theory, as depicted in the detailed presentation by Neil Doncaster and supported by Stewart Regan, which had prompted fears of cash flow loss to the SFL next season. We have obtained a copy of the Settlement Agreement signed up to by the SPL and the SFL in April 1998 - it is clear that the agreement is not ambiguous in this regard and there is no scope for the SPL to fail to meet the obligations to the SFL except by deliberately breaching the agreement. Neil Doncaster was unequivocal when he said that there would be no payment under the agreement and stressed that it was not the board of the SPL that made big decisions, it was the clubs themselves. We have concluded that it defies credibility that the SPL clubs would instruct the SPL to deliberately breach a legal agreement. To assist the SFL clubs to take decisions in the right manner then the external threat should be removed by the SPL clubs, confirming to the SFL that they have not and will not instruct the SPL to breach the Settlement Agreement.

Consideration was then given to Resolution 1 which we concluded required to be reworded to be explicit that entry was to SFL3. The reason for this is that once entered to the SFL in the manner proposed under Resolution 1, we understand that it is within the power of the Board of the SFL to place a club into any league of their choosing. We believe that, due to the intolerable pressure placed on the SFL board to date by external parties, this resolution should be explicit to avoid the Board coming under pressure from either the SFA or SPL in the event that Resolution 2 is rejected. It is also our opinion that Resolution 1 being explicit sits more appropriately with Resolution 2 which in itself is explicit about where any club might play.

In terms of Resolution 1, whether reworded or not, it seemed inconceivable to the Board of Clyde that absolutely no information whatsoever has been provided to support the resolution. This is clearly a matter of haste and again driven by an external agenda, perhaps because Sevco have not lodged an application to join the SFL then they have not submitted any information. Whilst we have accepted that this is being treated as a special case and we are willing to run with this, it simply was not possible to conclude that we could make any decision at this time. The matter is made worse because of the extent of uncertainty which hangs over Sevco. There is no need to prepare an exhaustive list of the issues as they are well publicised, however the extent of outstanding sanctions that may or may not be levied against a club which has yet to obtain SFA membership, together with the increasing number of possible commercial and legal challenges to the transactions to date simply presents a significant risk to the ability of the club to fulfil its fixtures in any league. Given that some of these matters are in the hands of the governing bodies it seems inexplicable that they are left hanging. We are clear that for the good of the game that we would want a swift and positive conclusion that would see Rangers Football Club taking part in the game again and we would wish to be able to support a Resolution that saw them entered to SFL3. However, until we receive enough information to inform such a decision then we are being pushed into a corner which would actually leave any club making a logical decision arrive at the conclusion that Resolution 1 should not be supported. The SFA could assist the process by transferring the SFA membership to Sevco prior to the Friday meeting if they have satisfied themselves of fit and proper tests and have carried out their own diligence on the viability of the club and the various legal challenges.

Resolution 2 suffers from the same issues as Resolution 1, in that no information of any sort about Sevco, not even whether it will obtain SFA membership, leaves no possibility of making a decision about entry to the SFL based on facts or logic. Clearly it is incumbent on all the governing bodies to make available all factual information they have available if they truly want this process to have any chance of being recovered from the current chaos. At the very least the business plan for Sevco and any other information that led the SPL clubs to arrive at a decision should be made available to the SFL clubs, and not with inappropriately short notice, although that point has as good as passed. Resolution 2 was where the challenge to sporting integrity arose. It was impossible to engage with this concept without continually bearing in mind that the SFA had already undermined the prospects for any integrity to be maintained by making it clear that failure to deal with the admission of a newco to SFL3 would be a dereliction of duty. In effect posting notice that no matter what decision is taken by the SFL clubs to administer their league, the SFA would not tolerate anything other than SFL 1, an equivalent point having been made by Neil Doncaster on behalf of the SPL clubs. The stated position of the SFA and SPL chief executives means that, whilst this club can have faith in David Longmuir to do all in his power to deliver a new combined structure that meets the objectives of Resolution 2, we have no faith in the parties that the new arrangements would be negotiated with. Their behaviour to date is evidence enough for us. We should not be disingenuous on our own position in terms of the question of trading sporting integrity for transformational change to the way the game is governed that is posed by Resolution 2. We have said previously that there would be no winners and that compromise would be required at some point. With this in mind, had we worked through this process and seen positive collaborative behaviour from the leaders of the SFA and SPL and we were challenged with backing Resolution 2 in exchange for revolutionary change that would truly benefit the game as a whole, then we would have engaged with that. As it stands, we have no information on the proposals other than that distributed in advance of the meeting last week and no confidence in the parties that will control the process outside of the SFL. As such we would vote no to Resolution 2.

Resolution 3, as many have pointed out this resolution seems presumptuous as no invitation has been issued from the SPL to either club. Again, this arises because of the external pressures, the haste and the failure of other bodies to complete their own processes. As things stand, whilst Sevco/Newco was not voted into the SPL, it seems that the SPL still has 12 members based on the reported voting at the SPL meeting last week, albeit one of whom is in liquidation. It seems to make more sense that the SPL complete their processes and make the appropriate invitation for a club to join the SPL. We would seek to support whichever of our member clubs are invited to join the SPL to make that move, however, at the moment there is no certainty that Sevco will be entered into the SFL and the SFL should not risk leaving itself short of a team.

In summary, the complete absence of information on Sevco Scotland Ltd renders it impossible to vote with any logic in favour of any of the Resolutions. The default in these circumstances would unfortunately be to vote against. We hope and trust that this unacceptable situation will be resolved swiftly and will allow Clyde Football Club to support Resolution 1 from an informed position and will see Rangers Football Club playing in SFL3. We see Resolution 2 as a matter of trust and it would take a change of personnel and attitude for us to be confident that David Longmuir would be entering discussions with a group of people committed to a collaborative process in a spirit of genuine partnership. In the current circumstances our only decision could be to vote against Resolution 2. Subject to a satisfactory outcome on Resolution 1 we would support Resolution 3.

The three resolutions presented to the club are as follows:-

(i) That the Scottish Football League Members agree to admit Sevco Scotland Limited as an Associate Member and agrees to permit Rangers F.C. to play in the League during Season 2012/13.

(ii) That the Scottish Football League Members direct the Board of Management of The Scottish Football League (the “Board”) to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the Third Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13 unless the Board shall have to its satisfaction negotiated and reached agreement with The Scottish Premier League and The Scottish Football Association on a series of measures which the Board shall consider to be in the best interests of the game, how it is structured, how it is governed and how it is financed, whereupon the Board shall be authorised to provide that Rangers F.C. shall play in the First Division of the Scottish Football League during Season 2012/13.

(iii) That the Scottish Football League Members in terms of Rule 12 approve the resignation of either Dundee F.C. or Dunfermline Athletic F.C., whichever shall be admitted to join the Scottish Premier League for Season 2012/13, such resignation to take effect as at the date of admission of such club to the Scottish Premier League, notwithstanding that the requisite notice under Rule 12 shall not have been given.Details of the series of measures referred to at (ii) above shall be made available to the Members in advance of the meeting and an opportunity for full discussion of those measures will be given prior to the proposals being put to the meeting.

From www.clydefc.co.uk

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers newco: Hamilton hit back

Another day, another statement.

Hamilton this time, again capturing the anger that SFL feel about the position they've been put in. And still no response from the SPL "no to newco" majority that could help allay these fears.

Coupled with the earlier statement from Raith might we be moving to a position where the SFL clubs refuse to take any vote on admitting the Rangers newco? That would certainly heap the pressure back on the SPL and SFA.

The full statement:

As you all know I attended the SFL meeting earlier this week to discuss the various proposals put to us by the SFA/SFL/SPL. We have subsequently had a board meeting to discuss the consequences of each of these scenarios. It is also now apparent that Rangers Newco will not play in the SPL next season.

As you are aware the proposal being favoured by the governing bodies is that Rangers Newco are parachuted into the Irn Bru SFL Division 1, contrary to Scottish Football League rules. If our Governing bodies ever get round to tabling any firm proposal to vote on it is unlikely in our opinion that this proposal, in isolation, would be acceptable to the members.

We believe that a complete overhaul of the game is required for the good of Scottish Football. League Reconstruction, play-offs, a fairer financial distribution model and a more effective Corporate Governance are some of the major issues which require to be addressed. The current circumstances we find ourselves in have created an opportunity for these changes to be implemented.

We believe the problems facing the game are not of the SFL’s making and as such would strongly suggest that the SFA, our governing body, take immediate ownership of the current situation in tandem with the two League bodies, and table a set of proposals at next week’s meeting providing a solution for the way forward in the best interests of Scottish Football.

In the meantime the situation changes daily and it is our view that HAFC and the other SFL clubs should not be put in the position to vote on something which may destroy Scottish Football.

Thank you for your support in these most challenging of times.

Les Gray
Chairman HAFC

From www.acciesfc.co.uk

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers newco: The wrath of Raith

In a football story jammed with villains, Raith Rovers have offered up one of the few men to be hailed as a heroe.

Director Turnbull Hutton has consistently called out the SFA and the SPL on their bullying and their half truths.

It was Hutton spoke of "corruption" on the steps of Hampden, the parish councillor taking the fight to the doors of Westminster.

On Friday evening Raith released a statement regarding next week's SFL vote.

It should make the SPL and the SFA - and anyone who does actually care about Scottish football - uncomfortable.

Note the focus on the question of Rangers' ownership. As far as I'm aware this is the first time any other club has expressed concern about the medium term viability of the Duff and Phelps/Charles Green carve up of the oldco's assets.

Perhaps nothing more than conjecture. But as I mentioned last week Stewart Regan and Neil Doncaster are taking an even bigger risk in so heavily pushing for the First Division compromise if they are not absolutely certain of the sustainability of the new Rangers ownership.
Attention is also brought - as it should be by each and everyone of us - to the essential cowardice of the SPL voting "no" and then shutting up shop, refusing to disown their own chief executives tactics and offering no support to the SFL clubs.

The Raith statement in full:

The club has this evening received the notice of resolutions to be voted on next Friday and we are told to expect an information pack at some time next week. We hope that this pack will present a more balanced report to SFL member clubs than they have so far received.

At last Tuesday’s meeting, financial information provided by Neil Doncaster showed an unrealistic worst case scenario. It showed the impact of potential total loss of 3 TV contracts, all of which had been inexplicably agreed on the basis that the broadcaster could walk away if either Rangers or Celtic were not in the SPL. His information did not, however, set out the potentially positive impact of negotiating replacement contracts with other broadcasters or alternatively the much mentioned possibility of launching SPL TV (which we understand could have been launched within a matter of months).

Mr Doncaster warned SFL members that if these contracts were indeed lost, this would mean the annual payment to the SFL under the Settlement Agreement would either be greatly reduced or not paid at all. Raith Rovers FC believes this not to be the case, and that the SPL would remain both contractually obliged and able to pay the £1.9m – £2m annual sum, even in that worst case scenario. We call upon the SFL Board to clarify its view on this vital point urgently, before club boards finalise their positions on these important votes.

We are also concerned that there has not as yet been an opportunity for clubs to receive legal advice from the SFL and/or debate the potential consequences on the smooth running of our league in the event that the Courts are asked to annull/strike down any of the corporate transactions that have led to the current position of Sevco Scotland Ltd as owners of certain assets of the Rangers oldco. Indeed, the position as regards the potential sanctions to be applied by the Scottish FA via its Appellate Tribunal has also still to be bottomed out. In summary, we remain concerned that the SPL clubs have overwhelmingly voted to pass on this potential time bomb, which may yet explode once passed to the SFL’s jurisdiction, and we are being asked to accept this new company into membership, worse still in our top division.

Without all of this information, and the opportunity for clubs to further discuss these issues on a fully informed basis amongst themselves before the formal SGM, in a similar format to last Tuesday’s meeting, we are concerned that the fairness and transparency of the process itself is at risk of being compromised.

Raith Rovers FC will consider its stance with regard to attendance at this meeting once we receive the information from the SFL.

From www.raithrovers.net 

Rangers newco: Understanding "no"

This post isn't aimed at any one club.

It's not aimed at any one director, chief executive or chairman.

It's written more in bemusement and sadness than in anger.

If there is an overarching theme it won't be a profound one. It will more likely be "what the hell is happening to our game."

Rangers won't get into the SPL.

We know that. We know it emphatically because 10 out of 12 SPL votes made it so.

Kilmarnock, for reasons that their explanation didn't quite explain, abstained.

Charles Green, owner of the new Rangers but dispatched to Hampden as a proxy vote for the old Rangers, voted yes. The Rangers fans might not trust him but at least he voted for the right side.

So I'm confused.

The SPL clubs overwhelmingly thought they could survive without the newco Rangers.

But Neil Doncaster, the SPL's missionary among our footballing natives, and Stewart Regan, chief executive of the neutral Scottish Football Association, are arguing that not just the SPL but Scottish football itself "WILL DIE" unless Rangers get back to the SPL in just one year.

Rangers need to be admitted to the SFL and pushed straight into the First Division.

Anything else would be madness, a living death or a painful suicide.

I'm still confused.

To get Rangers into the First Division the SPL and the SFA - still a neutral governing body until they declare themselves not to be - will try and persuade the clubs that make up the Scottish Football League.

By persuade they mean bully and threat.

And if they blow and they blow and they blow and they still don't blow the SFL house down?

Then they'll build their own house. With a moat. And a drawbridge.

And they'll raise that drawbridge. And they'll never, ever let the peasants in. Even if they're starving to death.

Let them eat cake.

So I'm still confused.

What does "no" mean in Scottish football?

When ten SPL chairmen say "no" to Rangers in the SPL what do they mean?

Do they just mean "no?"

Or do they mean "no, obviously that's no to the top flight but yes, yes, yes to getting them back in to the First Division. Or failing that the newly created SPL2?"

Do they mean "no, 'cause that's the best thing to do for football. As long as we can still whore ourselves to the corporate sponsors who like us to be trapped in a duopoly?"

Do they mean "no, just like our fans wanted to hear, so we can sell season tickets even though we meant yes to the SFL1 and cunningly side stepped that issue with our oh, so clever linguistic mastery?"

It would be nice to know more about "no."

Because right now it looks like people are taking the piss.

Until somebody defines "no" Kilmarnock's vote looks a totem of principle simply because it didn't hide behind a false righteousness.

It makes me doubt everyone.

What does a First Division chairman mean when he says "no?"

Does he mean "no is no but we'll agree to join the SPL2 if the diddy teams vote no as well?"

Confusion extends my befuddlement beyond the complexities of a simple "no."

What is a governing body?

Is the SFA supposed to govern every level of the game in Scotland and build the foundations for our national team to thrive?

Or are they supposed to send their chief executive out into the lower leagues with a suitcase full of used notes in one hand and a gun in the other?

Is that how the SFA dispenses justice "without fear or favour?"

What is a league competition if it can't survive without one of it's participants?

What would happen to competition in next season's First Division if Rangers didn't win it?

Would the SFA step in, without fear or favour, and promote them anyway? For the good of the game?

It's all very confusing.

It doesn't have to be.

The SPL chairmen who said "no" could sack Neil Doncaster today.

They could announce plans for a vote of no confidence in Stewart Regan.

They could disown the tactics of the men who have led us here, who have dragged the game to this stage.

They won't though. And that stinks.

It's wrong when a club says "we're being bullied but we have to say "yes" or we'll go out of business."

It's even worse when so many people hear that cry for help and say "screw you, spineless bastards" instead of condemning the bullies.

A sell out SPL Saturday?

That's a sell out.

Don't let them get away with it.

Shout and scream at your club. Write, email, phone and petition the SFA.

Don't give up until they stop this madness and apologise for the bullying, for the threats, for sheltering under the myth that they're doing what the fans want.

Demand they apologise to each and everyone of us for their complete lack of imagination when it comes to rebuilding this exasperating game of ours.

Until they do, there's only really one option:

Just say "no."

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers newco: Looking for a revolution

A drookit summer has seen Scottish football drowning in uncertainty and indecision.

We finally got a decision yesterday. The SPL chairmen voted against letting the Rangers newco into the top flight.

That was hardly surprising. Some of the chairmen - 10 said "no" - might have voted with a heavy heart and some might very well be daft.

But not daft enough to risk losing the core of their own support.

A predictable decision and not one that removed much uncertainty.

Too many clubs - the Rangers newco among them - don't yet know what league they will be playing in when the season kicks off in just a few weeks.

That the SPL saying "no" would force Rangers into the Third Division seemed the most plausible outcome until a few days ago.

Then the argument that the only way for Scottish football to survive was to parachute Rangers into the First Division was unleashed.

If the SFL clubs didn't agree then the SPL - whose role in all this should have ended yesterday when they said an emphatic "no" - would engineer a breakaway SPL2 to accommodate the newco.

Last night that theme was picked up by the SFA's Stewart Regan in a series of quotes that should - in a game governed by any sanity - disqualify him from holding office.

He has certainly destroyed any lingering hope that the SFA will adopt a neutral stance in any of this.

I don't really care that Regan diminishes himself with every utterance. I do care that he diminishes our game when he's doing it.

When a director of a First Division club stands on the steps of Hampden and denounces our game as "corrupt" then something is rotten to the core.

And for what?

Regan is giving up. Aided and abetted by the SPL's Neil Doncaster - who should really be run out of Hampden forthwith - he's surrendering.

He's seeking comfort in a broken business model. His vision of Scottish football is one where any real change is possible only if it suits the needs of television companies whose commitment to Scotland is half hearted at best.

He's saying that we can only thrive if we fix the game to allow a quick route back to the top flight for a club that has seen the most gargantuan mismanagement in Scottish football history.

A quick fix that most fans of that club seem to reject themselves.

He's saying that it's OK to bully lower league clubs if it provides solace for all the SPL clubs who have mismanaged their own finances.

And he's turning this cowardice on it's head and painting himself as some sort of hero.

He sees something heroic in saying that he's worked out a way to return as quickly as possible to a flawed status quo.

We deserve more. More than Regan and Doncaster, a couple of middle ranking marketing men who have fallen into the trap of believing their own lies.

More than footballing authorities who care not a jot for moving the game forward.

What could we learn from this long, bleak summer?

We know that fans care about the future, that they're prepared to speak up and show their passion.

Would the future of the Scottish game be better served by harnessing that passion or by allowing Regan to disenfranchise more and more supporters?

We've seen that the SPL experiment has failed. It's failed to create a sustainable model for its clubs, failed to create an environment that could predict or halt a huge corporate collapse in its midst.

The SPL was the game's attempt to hitch a lift to a promised land,  to the riches of unfettered sporting capitalism. Scottish football didn't get there. It got run over and left behind.

Greed, chasing the quick buck, canoodling with corporate sponsors and ignoring the fans hasn't worked.

But the fans are still there. They still care.

Could we not take the positives from that and create a more sustainable game, a more sensible game?

A new football model for Scotland that has fans and communities at its heart? A game that we could again be proud of?

It won't be easy. Of course it won't.

But if Dundee United or Hibs, Hearts or Aberdeen, Kilmarnock or Elgin, Cowdenbeath or Stranraer are surviving only on the back of four Old Firm games a season and 30 pieces of Sky's silver then we need to make hard decisions.

We need to reinvent. We need to involve the fans in that reinvention.

And we need to do it quickly.

It will take vision though. It will take inspiration.

When we look for vision or inspiration at Hampden what do we find?

Stewart Regan and Neil Doncaster.

Their vision condemns us to relive the mistakes of the past. Their vision won't halt the "slow, lingering death" of Scottish football it will only perpetuate it.

Don't believe them, stand up to them. Tell your club how you feel, shout it from the rooftops.

Every fan of every club should have had enough of being let down by non entities like this.

It's our game and they are our clubs.

Now is the time to prove it.


Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers newco: A cowardly compromise

Scottish football has had a sickly pallor for some time. An anaemic game, given to petty squabbles and entrenched self preservation.

A game that at times looked determined to throttle itself to a slow, painful death.

A game with only one real talent: an unerring ability to make a bad situation worse.

This propensity for own goals, for punching itself repeatedly in the face, for encouraging ridicule surfaced again yesterday.

The Rangers saga had appeared to be drawing to something of a conclusion.

A conclusion that was never going to satisfy everyone but a conclusion nonetheless.

Against what might have been their better financial judgement the SPL clubs were gradually declaring their voting intentions.

If sporting integrity was becoming an increasingly weary phrase, the intent was at least clear: Rangers had erred on a grand scale, the Rangers newco could not be readmitted to the SPL and other clubs appreciated that they had to vote not for TV contracts or sponsors but for their own fans.

With the SPL route cut off Rangers would have to apply to join the SFL.

Most of us expected that application to be accepted. Rangers would join the third tier and work their way up. Much like we'd expect any club to do if they'd been so warped by greed, hubris and misguided ambition that they'd spent themselves into oblivion.

And then something changed.

Suddenly the SFL clubs wouldn't be asked to vote on the new Rangers entering the bottom division.

Now they'd be asked to OK Rangers entering the First Division. The SPL would give the SFL a million quid for TV rights, bring in play-offs after next season and the two organisations would be merged.

If the SFL clubs refused to agree to this fait accompli then there were dark hints of a breakaway SPL2 lifting the drawbridge on promotion and relegation.

Comply or die.

Let us cling to the positives if we can.

Are there any? Perhaps. Many of us have long agitated for some kind of league reconstruction, we've argued for a merger of the failed SPL and the SFL.

But we wanted these things to help shape the long term future of the game.

We didn't want them because Rangers had died. We didn't want them rushed in just four weeks before the league gets underway. We didn't want them to shaft every club in the Second Division and every club in the Third Division.

Who's behind all this?

The SFA's Stewart Regan and the SPL's Neil Doncaster?

Some SPL clubs are already trying to distance themselves. If it is indeed the case that Doncaster has gone off message, waging a guerilla war then there is a simple solution: when the newco vote is taken next week the meeting can end with a request for his resignation and with an apology issued to the SFL clubs.

Don't hold your breath.

The tragedy - one of the tragedies, this whole affair is now an avalanche of tragedy - is that nobody has stopped to ask what they're trying to preserve.

They want to keep Rangers because that will sustain and protect the current SPL business model.

But that they're going to such lengths is because Rangers failed - a failure that surely condemns that business model to history.

We need to reinvent the wheel. Instead Doncaster, Regan and whoever else - and there are undoubtedly SPL clubs up to their necks in this ridiculous salvage operation - are rummaging in their sheds to find bits of string to tie it back together again.

They're also putting a hell of a lot of faith in Charles Green, current owner of the newco Rangers. More faith than a - belatedly - suspicious Rangers support seem keen to invest.

They're going to be in trouble if it turns out they've prostituted themselves and gerrymandered the Scottish game for another purveyor of bullshit.

And the sheer cack handedeness of it. The document circulated to the SFL clubs is flimsy on detail, big on unsubstantiated claims and quite stunning in its naivety.

It's most telling line might just be this perceived benefit of the plan, an opportunity, say the authors, to:

Allow fans to engage in the bigger picture

The author of that line doesn't just fail to understand Scottish football, they're a very real danger to Scottish football.

Where does this end up?

With Rangers in the First Division I suspect. Or an SPL2 - a concept that was basically rubbish when Rangers weren't liquidated and remains rubbish today.

A miserable compromise that seems to please almost nobody aside from a few men in power. A bullying fiddle dreamt up by cowards and charlatans.

When did we get to this stage?

When did we wake up one day and realise that the idiots we despised at school were somehow running the game we love?

How have we let that happen?

Is it our fault for not doing enough to hound these folk, not doing enough to get the game we wanted rather than the game that some marketing confidence trickster who was crap at Norwich and has been even crapper up here wanted?

Maybe it is.

So why not just get on with it Neil? Take it away Stewart.

Get Rangers into the First Division. Enjoy the benefits of your preserved TV deal and accept the congratulations of your sponsors the next time you meet them at a hospitality lunch.

When Rangers get promoted back to the SPL next season allow yourself some satisfaction and think: "I did that."

But when our stadiums empty, when clubs that have acquiesced in a culture that defines them as bottom feeders lose sponsors, when players refuse to sign for teams that not only didn't object to a duopoly but actually craved that domination, when people laugh at Scottish football, chuckle at this backward game that only felt safe in the embrace of a bankrupt club, when every Scottish child asks for an EPL replica shirt from Santa.

Then you can think: "Yeah, I did that as well."

STV is the place to be for coverage of this unmitigated disaster

Wings over Scotland demolishes the SFL document

Rangers newco: Hibs statement

Hibs this morning issued a statement regarding yesterday's news that plans were being put in place to parachute Rangers into the First Division.

With fans getting somewhat annoyed at this latest proposal, Hibs - whose chairman Rod Petrie was said to have met newco owner Charles Green - have moved with uncharacteristic speed to get a message to the fans.

Of course it doesn't actually say if they agree with the First Division option or not:

At an informal meeting of SPL clubs held at Hampden Park yesterday, the views of Hibernian FC were represented by Chairman Rod Petrie. The Chairman articulated very clearly that the Club is ready and willing to cast its vote on the transfer of the Rangers share in the SPL at the formal meeting of clubs on 4 July.

The Chairman made the point that the vote should proceed without any further delay and that Hibernian FC will vote against the share transfer. The resolution will fail if four other clubs vote against it or abstain. If as a result of the vote on 4 July the Rangers newco is not voted into the SPL then it will be for other bodies to decide if and at what level Rangers might be accommodated within Scottish football.

(Published on Hibernianfc.co.uk on 29th June)

Rangers: Newco or no go?

A liquidated Rangers start life again as a newco. The Rangers Football Club.

Rangers are no more.

Not quite, of course. The football team - its home and its training facilities if not its players - has a new owner in a new corporate structure.

For now ownership lies with a consortium led by Charles Green. Tomorrow, next week, next month it might be a consortium led by Walter Smith.

Even after liquidation Rangers are haunted by uncertainty and tussled over by businessmen to the bewilderment of the ordinary fan.

But a new Rangers have indeed risen from the liquidated shell of the old company.

Where do they go now?

The decision that most SPL chairmen didn't want to make now lies with them.

Yes to the Rangers newco?

No to the Rangers newco?

It makes me worry about the business acumen available to Scottish football if it is indeed true that representatives of the other 11 clubs sat round a table and allowed themselves to be persuaded that Rangers didn't face the prospect of liquidation.

I suspect, however, it's far easier to convince an audience if they already want to believe what you're saying.

And how the SPL chairmen must have hoped that they didn’t have to make this choice.

Vote "yes" to a newco and stick with the comfort of familiarity.

Maybe the odd sanction to give an impression of resoluteness - or hope that the SFA do that for you - and then carry on as before.

Or vote "no" and take a step into the unknown.

When Rangers first went into administration I wrote that what is a simple moral decision for fans wouldn't necessarily be reflected by directors facing more complex debates about what their choice would mean for their own clubs.

That remains the case.

Fans have been vocal and overwhelming in their opposition to Rangers being allowed entry to the league.

Supporters are often out of step with their chairmen and directors. No SPL club is yet run as a democracy, these are not elected officials and more often than not what they feel is best for us and our clubs doesn't chime with the wishes of large sections of their "customer base."

But the strength of opinion here is perhaps unprecedented across the clubs. Can the men who will ultimately make the decision afford to ignore that?

Ramifications for the TV deal and other potential losses of income will influence their decision. The clubs themselves should be better acquainted with the consequences of refusing entry than anyone else.

And yes, protecting revenue streams is important. But the sheer scale of the financial folly at Rangers means that being seen to capitulate to a newco might have even graver consequences.

The idea of "sporting integrity" risks being cheapened by over use in recent weeks.

But if the other clubs are prepared to let Rangers back simply so they can chug along in the shadow of two dominant clubs, unable to stand on their own two feet, then the SPL can make no pretence at being a sporting entity anyway.

We've seen what greed and bad management can do to football clubs. Now should be a time to readjust.

I suspect that the scale of Rangers' wrongdoing, the lack of humility in the face of that wrongdoing, the "you'll die without us" attitude and the weight of public opinion is beginning to tip the balance against a newco.

I've also got a feeling that clubs struggling with their own finances won't buy the line that Rangers have been punished enough with a European ban, a ten point deduction and a period of emotional turmoil.

Fans of Rangers and fans of other clubs will always be at loggerheads on these issues but "we've been punished enough" is a bad argument to make.

It focuses attention on the litany of misdemeanours and leads the listener to the conclusion that contrition is unlikely to follow.

Rangers cocked-a-snook at corporate governance, stiffed their creditors and were gobbled up for pennies by a man who didn't see any problem in discussing transfer targets even as football debtors went unpaid.

It sends out a very dangerous message for the future of football governance in this country if a place is set for them and they are warmly welcomed back to the top table.

That is really not punishment enough.

The issue of football governance also means that the inquiry into alleged impropriety in player's contracts must be allowed to run its course.

The outcome of that investigation will tell us much about the health of the game in this country.

If a vote on the newco is taken before any findings are delivered then that vote will be compromised, a decision made without full possession of the facts.

Like everything else in this sorry saga the timescales are rushed, the details murky, the outcomes uncertain.

Should new Rangers be allowed into the SPL?

No.

Will new Rangers be allowed into the SPL?

Possibly.

A month ago I would have said they almost certainly would be. I think they still probably will be but it's no longer such a certainty.

The next few weeks are going to be messy, divisive and nasty.

Whatever the decision, for better or for worse, I suspect Scottish football will never be the same again.

The history issue

Does a newco retain the history of the oldco?

The findings of the current SPL investigation notwithstanding I find it unlikely that any directive is going to be issued from Hampden denying "new" Rangers the list of trophies won by "old" Rangers.

That won't stop fans of other clubs trying to deny fans of Rangers that history.

And it won't stop Rangers fans trying to deny fans of other clubs the right to deny them of that history.

A difficult one to be sure.

If you've watched Rangers at Ibrox for 20 years and plan to watch them at Ibrox for another 20 years I find it unlikely that you're going to consider 2012 a dividing line separating the achievements of the old and the new.

History in this case is surely subjective. Fans will bicker over this forever and a day but they'll only be bickering over a perception of whether this is "Year Zero" or not.

Your own perception might depend if you love Rangers or if you hate them. If you're stuck in the middle you'll probably just hear "blah, blah, blah."

I'm not sure the next time Hibs host Rangers I'll be thinking "Well, this is jolly nice, this is the first time we've met these boys in blue at Easter Road, I do hope we go on to forge a superior record to them in our head-to-head clashes."

I don't really think it works like that. Rivalry understandably inspires glee that Rangers' history will be wiped out. But it doesn't give anyone "control" of that history or someone else's interpretation of history.

(If the SFA were to offer guidance on this - and what could possibly go wrong if that august body starts wrestling with the philosophical issues involved in taking ownership of history - might I also suggest they bring in some governance on the issue of stars above badges which has, frankly, given over to anarchy in recent seasons.)

My own view?

If you ask me when Hibs were formed I'll say "6th August 1875."

I won't mention the period in the early 1890s when the club was forced into what we might call abeyance.

The timeline goes back to the beginning, skipping over the break.

The history of football clubs is a powerful thing and it has always been about more than decisions made in committee rooms, law courts or tax offices.

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

Rangers: An end of sorts

Nine minutes.

Not a long time.

But that's all it took for creditors to reject a CVA proposal and condemn Rangers to liquidation.

Before those nine minutes: months of uncertainty and years of greed, lies, broken promises and charlatans running a historic football club into the ground.

Today was expected. We learnt this week that HMRC would block the CVA. The end was coming before even that.

In a story where little has been guaranteed, the only rule has been that bad news today will likely be followed by worse news tomorrow for Rangers.

That we sensed liquidation was inevitable has maybe inured us to its impact.

Take a moment to think about it, ignore the whirlwind that has come since.

This has been a remarkable day.

Rangers. Scottish football's most successful snaffler of domestic honours, a financial powerhouse, the club that saw itself as an institution to rival the pillars of Scotland's establishment.

None of that was enough to save them.

In a sport dominated by business here is proof that historic achievements and continued success can't insulate clubs from the destructive attentions of the rogues and crooks who see football as a way to massage their egos and feather their own nests.

A salutary lesson for our times.

What next?

Charles Green has taken control of the old company's assets and sets up a new company called The Rangers Football Club.

He will expect the SPL and SFA to rubber stamp this manoeuvre and the team to start next season unhindered by historical controversy - but with their histoic achievements intact - and free of any debt except any that which he's created to fund his takeover.

He thinks he's got a big football club on the cheap, the creditors already stiffed, a fine opportunity to make himself richer.

It's a solution that has always looked problematic.

The other SPL clubs, with the vocal encouragement of their fans, seem to have been hardening against the newco option as the weeks have dragged on and those running Rangers have continually groped in the dark to find others to blame for their predicament.

And Green himself presents a problem. The only character references forthcoming describe him as something that sounds a lot like "a total runt" and in his public utterances he's displayed either a worrying naivety about the realities of the challenges ahead or an inability to tell the truth in his bluff Yorkshire accent.

And now another twist.

We were promised just a short window between this morning's confirmation of liquidation and Green's bargain basement hoovering up of the assets.

A short window. But enough time for Walter Smith to attempt to lead a new cavalry to the rescue.

Suddenly Smith had the backing of, amongst others, Jim McColl and Douglas Park and wanted to buy the Rangers newco. Here was Walter, the stony-haired sage, urging Green to step aside and let proper Rangers people help a newco phoenix rise from the ashes of financial arson.

An oddly dramatic flourish from Smith and the money men standing four-square behind him. It certainly had an impact.

Although Rangers' representatives had somehow apparently convinced their SPL colleagues that liquidation was not "on the radar" it had become inevitable.

That being the case, proper Rangers people didn't want blood on their hands. Far better to let Craig Whyte, Duff & Phelps and Charles Green take the heat of liquidation then ride to the rescue once the deed had been done.

That was a guaranteed way of seizing the initiative and the narrative: Green killed Rangers, Walter wants to help them rise again.

Simplistic of course, but that seemed to be the plan, to reach into Rangers' past to find a figure that gave hope for the future.

Too late?

Green confirmed that the transfer of the assets to his consortium has already taken place and applications for the transfer of SFA and SPL membership were ready to be submitted.

The key to staging a last-minute heroic intervention is timing. Walter's watch was slow.

That doesn't mean the Smith consortium is dead: they could buy the newco from Charles Green tomorrow and deliver him a tidy profit for a very short commitment to Scottish football.

Or is Green stubborn enough to hold out? He might well be. You don't make the number of enemies he made at Sheffield United and then try to get back into football if you don't have a healthy contrary streak. For now he looks to be king of the castle.

His statement confirming the purchase also made a great play of contradicting today's Daily Record and standing by Ally McCoist: he's not going to give in to one Rangers legend but he's keeping another to comfort the fans.

Yet Smith's backers must always have known that Green was likely to move quickly, they're unlikely to be put off if they have to buy the club from him.

Even as Green spoke to press Ian Hart - publicly announced today as a member of his consortium - was saying "who me? Nah, I'm backing Walter's mob."

An inauspicious start. We can be confident that Walter Smith will not take Green up on his invitation to become chairman tomorrow.

With Smith's group on the sidelines Green can also look forward to fans - and sections of the media - barracking loudly and agitating for him to sell up. He's going to endure an uncomfortable few days.

The ownership question will have long term implications for Rangers and might also colour the club's approach to the SPL's newco vote.

If Smith's consortium do seize control I'd expect a very different Rangers approach, a contrite board talking of rebuilding the club within a stronger Scottish game - even if Smith himself find himself answering question about his own experience with the EBT payment scheme operated during David Murray's tenure.

Charles Green's approach is likely to focus more on bluster, talk of deals and high level talks that are based only loosely in reality, pandering to a fanbase that would do well to not get fooled again.

There are still high stakes to play for.

That might be another reason for the lack of shock today.

Ranger were liquidated. But closure on this tumultuous era doesn't seem much nearer.

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.

SPL: Fair or foul

The tranquility of my holiday haven on the Solway Coast is shattered as we come closer to answering a question that has vexed us for weeks:

What would the SPL do if Rangers took the ultimate plunge into liquidation before emerging on the other side as a "newco?"

Today an SPL statement regarding 'Financial Fair Play' shed some light on the issue:

On 30 April 2012 the SPL Clubs will consider a range of proposals to amend the Articles and Rules of the SPL. A brief description of the effect of adopting the Resolutions is provided below.

Resolution 1 proposes an increase in the sporting sanction (points deduction) on any Club which suffers or is subject to an Insolvency Event from 10 points to the greater of 15 points and 1/3 of the Club’s SPL points in the preceding season.

Resolution 2A proposes further sporting sanctions in the event that any Club undergoes an Insolvency Transfer Event (i.e. transfers its share in the SPL to a new company where this occurs because of the insolvency of the transferor) of 10 points in each of two consecutive seasons from the Insolvency Transfer Event.

Resolution 2B proposes revisions to the fee payment arrangements i.e. SPL fees to any Club which has undergone an Insolvency Transfer Event will be reduced by 75% in each of three consecutive seasons from the Insolvency Transfer Event.

Resolution 3 proposes extending sporting sanctions where an Insolvency Event is suffered by a Group Undertaking of a Member Club of the SPL (Group Undertaking is defined in Section 1161(5) of the Companies Act 2006).

Resolution 4 proposes updates and extensions to the definition of Insolvency Event in the SPL Rules.

Resolution 5 proposes updates and extensions to the definition of Insolvency Event in the SPL Articles and clarifies the process in the event that a Member which is the subject of an Insolvency Event is required to transfer its share in the Company.

Resolution 6 proposes a specific requirement in the SPL Rules that Clubs must pay their Players in terms of their Contracts of Service on due dates and places a duty on any Club to report any failure to pay its Players in a timely manner to the SPL. Failure to pay Players and / or to notify such failure to the SPL would be a breach of SPL Rules.

Resolution 7 proposes a requirement in the SPL Rules that Clubs report to the SPL any failure to make payments to HMRC in respect of PAYE and NIC (a Default Event). Any Club suffering such a Default Event will be subject to a Player Registration Embargo. Any failure to report a Default Event shall be a breach of the SPL Rules.

Resolutions 2B and 5 require the support of a minimum of 11 Clubs to be adopted; all other Resolutions require the support of a minimum of 8 Clubs to be adopted.

If adopted the amendments to the Articles and Rules will have effect from and including 14 May 2012 (the day after the last day of Season 2011/2012).

No further comment will be made in respect of these proposals until after the General Meeting on 30 April at which they will be considered by the Clubs.

So there we have it. On April 30th the 12 SPL clubs - Rangers will be represented by their administrators - will vote on the framework that would let "Rangers 2012" begin life in the SPL.

Shocked?

Perhaps.

Perhaps not.

I've argued since this whole affair blew up that the SPL - a league founded on greed and self-preservation or, if you prefer, a league founded to maximise commercial revenues - would likely find more solace in keeping Rangers close.

That has led them to this point. Of finding a way to keep Rangers in the SPL while still being seen to punish them.

The sort of compromise that Neil Doncaster will be well used to, the sort of compromise that he was an architect of when a Leeds United newco was admitted to the English Football League.

Hence a three season deduction in revenue and a two season points deduction of ten points.

Given the SPL's silence as they've ferreted away on these changes we might expect them to have been better. Immediately there appears an inconsistency in the severity of punishments being handed out for administration and liquidation.

And a ten point deduction for two seasons doesn't seem much. Half-hearted to the point of being meaningless.

It's a bad idea for the SPL to give the impression that Doncaster's drafted these changes on the back of Ralph Topping's cigar packet. But that's the impression that will linger.

Things to remember: these rule changes still need to be passed by the SPL's 12 men in suits. And Rangers are not yet liquidated, they might never be liquidated.

Still the Scottish football public is agog and aghast.

"Too lenient" cry the massed ranks of non-Rangers supporters.

"Too harsh" cry the Rangers fans.

"Badly timed" say Ibrox administrators Duff and Phelps while announcing a delay to their announcement of the preferred bidders. The interested parties are given time to digest the proposed rule changes and how they might affect their plans for the club.

Anecdotally I'm hearing a lot of people saying they'll be finished with the SPL if a new Rangers are allowed a place in the SPL under new rules.

I understand that argument but my own view will always be that I support my team not the league they play in and I will continue to do so.

I've also heard from Rangers fans arguing that they should say "screw the SPL" and join the SFL in a fit of pique.

With your club in something of a fix some humility would not go amiss. But there is an interesting theory wrapped up in the outrage: Rangers spending three seasons fighting through the league structure might actually reinvigorate the whole of Scottish football.

What we have learnt throughout this process, however, is that putting a 'For Sale' sign up outside Ibrox does not spark a rush of bargain hunters. The SPL might be flawed but I'm not sure all those interested in trying to clean up Rangers' mess would trade the top flight for the Third Division on a point of principle.

For prospective buyers it might really be a case of "SPL and sort of bust" or "SFL and completely bust."

It is likely that clubs will be voting on these changes with certain issues remaining unresolved.

The SPL will - rightly or wrongly - shrug off Rangers' outstanding tax issues by saying such matters should be dealt with by the relevant authorities not a football league.

They'll try and body swerve the morality of liquidation, of the businesses left out of pocket through Rangers' mismanagement, in much the same way.

The results of investigations carried out by the SFA and the SPL themselves might be harder to dodge.

But, if nothing else, the SPL is a refuge of the brass necked and the two faced. They'll sit out those controversies and say "actually those investigations are only relevant to the old Rangers, not this shiny, new mob we've let in to the league."

Those riders again: liquidation might not happen, the SPL clubs might not vote in favour of these proposals.

Liquidation might happen though, it might be unavoidable whatever the demands of the fans and whatever the intentions of the new owners. And the SPL might vote "yes."

We've seen today the ill feeling that will bring. And the damage it will do to the game.

I've said all along that the SPL decision makers were going to have a decision to make. A hard decision.

A decision that would cause a rammy like none we've seen before.

Nothing was decided today. But we got a glimpse of where we're headed.

That nobody is happy suggests we're on the road to a very SPL-like resolution. Please none of the people all of the time.

It's hard to see how, in the view of the paying public, the SPL can emerge from April 30th with anything other than an even more damaged product.

There remains a future for Scottish football.

It just doesn't look very bright right now.

Like this? Like the Scottish Football Blog on Facebook.