Scottish football are the victims, not Rangers
By Andrew Southwick:
A few weeks ago, while waiting to begin an interview, I listened as to my left a well-known broadcast journalist pushed an MSP for answers. "Is Scottish football in crisis?" he asked. The answer he received was that Craig Levein was working hard, that we should be excited about the current World Cup Qualifying campaign which presents a realistic hope of making Brazil 2014, that our U21 team is flourishing, that our women's national side are edging closer to historic Euro 2013 qualification, and that Kilmarnock and Hearts have recently lifted trophies that tend to stay within the confines of Glasgow.
The answer didn't impress. "No, I was talking about Rangers."
Ah, of course. Rangers are in crisis. Therefore, Scottish football is in crisis. More than that, only the Mayans apparent prediction of Armageddon in December can save Scottish football from falling to unthinkable depths.
Some would say though one man's crisis is another man's opportunity.
Hearts and Dundee United led the way, announcing they would reject a Newco in the Scottish Premier League, and last week ten clubs battened down the hatches and refused entry to the SPL. With each statement announcing their intentions, a cry of "Can't wait until they are in administration" is met by some well-meaning people in Govan.
Hibs fans packed Hampden, and have been outspoken against Newco Rangers. They may now need them fans more than ever.
Although you get the impression Vladimir Romanov took great pleasure in writing his statement, accusing Rangers of "destroying Scottish football," Tannadice chief Stephen Thompson did not take his decision lightly.
He knows fine well Dundee United are not in great financial health. He knows rejecting a Newco Rangers could have serious repercussions for his club in the future. However, in the end he didn't have much choice, for he was pushed into a corner both by the Rangers support and his own fans, and had to bet on tangerine and black.
Other clubs hinted at their intentions. Most didn't want the grief that comes from revealing what should have been a straight forward decision, and that is sad. Sad that we live in a country where it’s believed a club should be able to bully its way into the top division.
In the majority of the leagues in Europe, a club in a similar position to Rangers wouldn't even be getting this debate. They would be starting again, accepting their fate. Rangers fans may read this far and point out 80% of their support have voted for Division Three entry, but this was after Charles Green tried to bulldoze their way into the SPL in the first place.
I do also believe though that had this been Aberdeen, Hearts or Hibs in a similar position, we would still be having this conversation. Not only that, I think the SPL would have voted them back in, albeit with heavy sanctions, sanctions that club would have been grateful to accept in order to avoid starting at the bottom and working their way up. They would have been accepted because we don't have the mentality here that we want to kill off our biggest clubs, and a loss of Hearts or Aberdeen isn't beneficial to Scottish football.
It would easily survive without them, but that's not the point.
Rangers? They have talked their way out of any sympathy, so much so that Division Three is becoming the only option.
It takes a quite special level of arrogance to suggest that Scottish football will collapse without your club. That without your club, a whole football structure is basically nothing. That you can buy your way to success, lord it over the other teams, tell them you're better than them and need a better league to strut your stuff, then when you fail and fall into liquidation they have no right to judge you and should be keeping your perch free.
It's this "We are the people" attitude which has got them into this mess. The spend, spend, spend policy based on their assumption they deserve to be at the top table. David Murray stating his belief the big clubs, led by Rangers, will be playing in a foreign league because they have outgrown a set-up they have outspent.
This high and mighty mantra that has seen Rangers chasing a place in the English leagues or even creating a new one, ready to ditch a Scotland they feel they owe nothing to, who don't give them the power that they crave, where even all the trophies in the land do not satisfy them.
"We shouldn't be punished for something people who aren't at the club anymore have done" they cry. But they were Rangers, you will be Rangers when the transfer of assets is complete, you took the good times in their bucket loads and sailed down the river dismissing the little people. Even when the debts were huge, when the warnings were coming that Rangers had to reduce their debt, the criticism went towards Lloyds bank. The criticism came too from Walter Smith, a man who helped spend the millions in the good times, urged the club to continue to bankroll him when times were beginning to look bleak, and who now wants this new Rangers admonished of any blame.
Yet, object to them leapfrogging clubs with their own unique history who have had to live within their means for years, well then you're labeled petty, even fuelled with hatred, more concerned with destroying Rangers and Scottish football than anything else. Listen to the statements though, not just from Rangers fans but from apologists like Craig Burley. There is no concern for Scottish football; it's for Rangers, Celtic and preserving the status quo that has benefitted two clubs. They accuse others of destroying Scottish football to get at Rangers – but these clubs ARE Scottish football, you don't own a club like Annan or Elgin City to increase your bank account, you do it for the love of the game. They also want to stay in Scottish football, promote it and make it as competitive as possible, not smugly turn their noses up at the rest and look for a way to establish themselves somewhere else.
What is certain is that the SPL chairmen who cast their votes on July 4th - and the one from Kilmarnock who didn't - it is not their fault Rangers went into liquidation. Yet it could be them to stomach the punishment.
Their punishment could be a loss of revenue from their own supporters, quite rightly sickened at the thought of goal posts being moved to allow one club back in. Disgusted at the acceptance that essentially Rangers, and Celtic for that matter, can never be relegated or kept out of the SPL for too long, yet their own side can rightly fall down the divisions and languish there.
If the clubs do the right thing by their fans, then they receive threats of boycotts, of TV money falling from Sky, of sponsors pulling out. Clubs who were not at fault will feel the effects of Rangers liquidation, yet it is them who are being bullied into a corner.
All this from a club and support that refused to show any humility. The club failing to show even a fraction of decency, even a thought to offer an apology for the mess the 2012/13 fixture list is currently in until it suddenly occurred to them to do so at the meeting. An apology offered as a bargaining tool, not with any sincerity.
Game plan one was to book their spot back in the SPL, sanction free, because they are a special case. The special case being they are backed by a huge support encouraged to support them because of the success that has come their way.
They are bigger and more important than the Falkirks, Raith Rovers and St Johnstones of the world because the towns of Falkirk, Kirkcaldy and Perth see busloads of Old Firm fans swerve their local stadiums to head for Glasgow every weekend. Attracted to the teams that win more and compete on the bigger stages, something they achieve through financial might. Yet, when one giant falls, rather than Falkirk, Raith Rovers and St Johnstone taking the opportunity to be more successful than a Newco Rangers and try and get the next generation of kids in their town to support them, they should instead roll over and help one of the clubs that has decimated their chances of success for years.
With that looking to fail, they offered - in Gordon Smith's words "A great gesture" by looking to accept starting in the first division. It's almost as if that was the plan from the start; begin the negotiations by aiming as high as possible, then accepting a mid-table entrance. And that's a great gesture to Scottish football from Rangers, a jump of two divisions, essentially ending all promotion chances of what would be their fellow first division clubs, and coming back into the SPL where they'll boycott everyone who voted them out and demand the respect their status deserves.
The man charged with running our top league, of promoting it, of increasing coverage, increasing investment, of looking after all clubs equally – he will surely reject strongly to any such approach and be determined to talk up what the rest can offer? No, Neil Doncaster is supporting this nonsense. If Rangers are accepted into the first division, and return to the SPL the following season, it may make Sky happy, but Scottish football as a whole may as well close the doors.
Why would any sane person, who has witnessed Rangers and Celtic strangle the life out of Scottish football for the past two decades, be wishing to reinstate the status quo? At least before the rest had hoped one day things may change. Now we'll know it can't.
Let's get some facts in place. First of all, Rangers are not bigger than Scottish football. Rangers and Celtic together are not bigger than Scottish football. You can throw as many facts around as you like about Sky viewing figures, or away crowds. Sky Sports did not make Scottish football. Rangers and Celtic supporters did not build the history of Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen and Dundee United. They might have more fans and bigger egos, but a league of 40 senior teams should not have to beg from the bowl of two clubs, no matter who they are.
Here's the thing, our clubs seem scared. They've been scared for years. But now, when backed into the corner, they might just be thinking about coming out fighting. What use is there giving Rangers a helping hand up, putting them back on their pedestal? Soon they'll forget they ever where in liquidation. Soon they'll be back where certain sections of the support will sing the same songs that shame Scotland, dismissing the same clubs that voted them back in as diddy clubs not worth their time and effort, back broadcasting their intention to play in England or further afield because they are too big for our game.
Game plan one was to book their spot back in the SPL, sanction free, because they are a special case. The special case being they are backed by a huge support encouraged to support them because of the success that has come their way.
They are bigger and more important than the Falkirks, Raith Rovers and St Johnstones of the world because the towns of Falkirk, Kirkcaldy and Perth see busloads of Old Firm fans swerve their local stadiums to head for Glasgow every weekend. Attracted to the teams that win more and compete on the bigger stages, something they achieve through financial might. Yet, when one giant falls, rather than Falkirk, Raith Rovers and St Johnstone taking the opportunity to be more successful than a Newco Rangers and try and get the next generation of kids in their town to support them, they should instead roll over and help one of the clubs that has decimated their chances of success for years.
With that looking to fail, they offered - in Gordon Smith's words "A great gesture" by looking to accept starting in the first division. It's almost as if that was the plan from the start; begin the negotiations by aiming as high as possible, then accepting a mid-table entrance. And that's a great gesture to Scottish football from Rangers, a jump of two divisions, essentially ending all promotion chances of what would be their fellow first division clubs, and coming back into the SPL where they'll boycott everyone who voted them out and demand the respect their status deserves.
The man charged with running our top league, of promoting it, of increasing coverage, increasing investment, of looking after all clubs equally – he will surely reject strongly to any such approach and be determined to talk up what the rest can offer? No, Neil Doncaster is supporting this nonsense. If Rangers are accepted into the first division, and return to the SPL the following season, it may make Sky happy, but Scottish football as a whole may as well close the doors.
Why would any sane person, who has witnessed Rangers and Celtic strangle the life out of Scottish football for the past two decades, be wishing to reinstate the status quo? At least before the rest had hoped one day things may change. Now we'll know it can't.
Let's get some facts in place. First of all, Rangers are not bigger than Scottish football. Rangers and Celtic together are not bigger than Scottish football. You can throw as many facts around as you like about Sky viewing figures, or away crowds. Sky Sports did not make Scottish football. Rangers and Celtic supporters did not build the history of Hearts, Hibs, Aberdeen and Dundee United. They might have more fans and bigger egos, but a league of 40 senior teams should not have to beg from the bowl of two clubs, no matter who they are.
Here's the thing, our clubs seem scared. They've been scared for years. But now, when backed into the corner, they might just be thinking about coming out fighting. What use is there giving Rangers a helping hand up, putting them back on their pedestal? Soon they'll forget they ever where in liquidation. Soon they'll be back where certain sections of the support will sing the same songs that shame Scotland, dismissing the same clubs that voted them back in as diddy clubs not worth their time and effort, back broadcasting their intention to play in England or further afield because they are too big for our game.
Rangers can threaten to boycott if their place is not restored in the SPL. However, the choice has been there from day one, do you worry about visiting fans filling your ground or your own support filling it?
Rangers can threaten to leave for a foreign land. They've been doing it for years; no-one is taking them. Rangers on their own are nothing. Alongside Celtic they are just one fixture. They need a league. We have one, to play in it you abide by the rules, the same ones as everyone else.
Celtic's silence on this has been golden. From leading the chase for a place in England, to being outspoken in the demise of their rivals, all has suddenly gone quiet around Parkhead.
Perhaps, they have realised their ally isn't in the other ten clubs, it's in their friends from Ibrox. Without them, their shared outlook on Scottish football can no longer be forced on the rest. If voting rules are changed, so will many others like distribution of prize money for starters.
They think the Sky deal is theirs - it is only them that earned it. Take away the Old Firm and what have you left? Well, put that another way, take away the other clubs, leave the Old Firm to it, and what have you left?
Sky of course could pull out of Scottish football altogether. However, despite the horror stories, it is unlikely. Sky does not need to go to war with Scottish football. They don't need to risk losing some of their 600,000 Scottish customers by ignoring coverage. They simply have a preference that having a league with four Old Firm derbies in it makes their coverage more lucrative.
They make over £400,000,000 off of Scottish customers a year. A family of four may only have one person in the house interested in football, but the family could be paying up to £124 a month for their full package to satisfy the household.
If Sky pulls out, let’s say BT or Virgin decides to step in and maybe bid £15 million for one year of live games. All BT would need is 20,000 fans to move from Sky to BT, sign up to their new and improving package (that's your broadband, your phone line, etc), and they've just paid for their coverage. This is a company that has just shelled out over £500 million to get English Premiership coverage - Scottish football is a bargain in comparison considering north of Hadrian’s Wall sits their second biggest potential audience.
In fact, Scottish football is underpriced, considering the money it can generate from viewers. In Portugal, clubs negotiate their own TV contracts. Benfica in four years will earn the same in TV revenue as the whole of the SPL. Porto are not far behind. Even the smallest Primeira League clubs - who command crowds smaller than Hamilton Accies - can expect to see £800,000 a year. They’re actually talking about increasing the league there from 16 to 18 teams. We’re thinking of going from 12 back to 10.
Sky aren’t daft. If it was just down to quality, then they'd be throwing more German, Italian, French and Portuguese football at us. They don't, they get a massive return off Scotland with what is actually a fairly cheap price. Why walk away and lose customers to a rival?
Of course, as pointed out by Raith Rovers in their latest statement, why is Sky's money so important when not long ago our own SPL TV was being discussed?
What the rest need to do is preserve their fan base, rather than go grey worried about whether Rangers fans will ever pay them a visit again.
Sky of course could pull out of Scottish football altogether. However, despite the horror stories, it is unlikely. Sky does not need to go to war with Scottish football. They don't need to risk losing some of their 600,000 Scottish customers by ignoring coverage. They simply have a preference that having a league with four Old Firm derbies in it makes their coverage more lucrative.
They make over £400,000,000 off of Scottish customers a year. A family of four may only have one person in the house interested in football, but the family could be paying up to £124 a month for their full package to satisfy the household.
If Sky pulls out, let’s say BT or Virgin decides to step in and maybe bid £15 million for one year of live games. All BT would need is 20,000 fans to move from Sky to BT, sign up to their new and improving package (that's your broadband, your phone line, etc), and they've just paid for their coverage. This is a company that has just shelled out over £500 million to get English Premiership coverage - Scottish football is a bargain in comparison considering north of Hadrian’s Wall sits their second biggest potential audience.
In fact, Scottish football is underpriced, considering the money it can generate from viewers. In Portugal, clubs negotiate their own TV contracts. Benfica in four years will earn the same in TV revenue as the whole of the SPL. Porto are not far behind. Even the smallest Primeira League clubs - who command crowds smaller than Hamilton Accies - can expect to see £800,000 a year. They’re actually talking about increasing the league there from 16 to 18 teams. We’re thinking of going from 12 back to 10.
Sky aren’t daft. If it was just down to quality, then they'd be throwing more German, Italian, French and Portuguese football at us. They don't, they get a massive return off Scotland with what is actually a fairly cheap price. Why walk away and lose customers to a rival?
Of course, as pointed out by Raith Rovers in their latest statement, why is Sky's money so important when not long ago our own SPL TV was being discussed?
What the rest need to do is preserve their fan base, rather than go grey worried about whether Rangers fans will ever pay them a visit again.
Aberdeen had an average crowd of 14,035 ten years ago. Even if you take away the two home games against Rangers that year, their average sat at 13,528. Compare that to last season's average of 9,292. That's over 4,000 Aberdeen fans that have walked away in recent years. They've walked away due to the football on display, the lack of goals, excitement, and the Dons inability to place any higher than ninth.
Why can't Aberdeen get those fans back, especially when 14,000 made a lunchtime trip to Hampden in April? Rangers have nothing to do with their choice to stay at home, they're Aberdeen supporters, you don't support a club based on who their rivals are. The same can be said for the Hearts fans who filled their stadium in 2006 and once had the club talking about upgrading to a 25,000 seated ground. The Hibs fans who were enthralled by Scott Brown, Kevin Thomson, and Derek Riordan before the big bucks stole them away.
There's a recurring theme with most Scottish clubs. Sure, they have their cult heroes that came in on a Bosman, but mainly all clubs can count to their most exciting sides being filled with players produced from their youth system or the lower leagues. So why fear if clubs have to down the chequebook and produce more of their own?
I'd rather see a league being competed for by clubs vying to produce the best XI, not clubs who argue over who has bought the best XI.
What is to fear about young kids being more attracted to your team than a third division Rangers? What's to fear from a one-horse race at the top when a two-horse one was always two far ahead of you to get involved? Why fret about our club chairmen, who have sat for years in too comfortable of position, now forced into being proactive, knowing they need to start getting you and me back in the ground rather than waiting for a cash cow visiting twice a season from Glasgow?
Here's the thing too. If without Rangers our clubs started going to the wall, then we can do something about it. We can rip up Scottish football and start again, for I'd rather see that than continue for another twenty years with what we have now.
Why can't Aberdeen get those fans back, especially when 14,000 made a lunchtime trip to Hampden in April? Rangers have nothing to do with their choice to stay at home, they're Aberdeen supporters, you don't support a club based on who their rivals are. The same can be said for the Hearts fans who filled their stadium in 2006 and once had the club talking about upgrading to a 25,000 seated ground. The Hibs fans who were enthralled by Scott Brown, Kevin Thomson, and Derek Riordan before the big bucks stole them away.
There's a recurring theme with most Scottish clubs. Sure, they have their cult heroes that came in on a Bosman, but mainly all clubs can count to their most exciting sides being filled with players produced from their youth system or the lower leagues. So why fear if clubs have to down the chequebook and produce more of their own?
I'd rather see a league being competed for by clubs vying to produce the best XI, not clubs who argue over who has bought the best XI.
What is to fear about young kids being more attracted to your team than a third division Rangers? What's to fear from a one-horse race at the top when a two-horse one was always two far ahead of you to get involved? Why fret about our club chairmen, who have sat for years in too comfortable of position, now forced into being proactive, knowing they need to start getting you and me back in the ground rather than waiting for a cash cow visiting twice a season from Glasgow?
Here's the thing too. If without Rangers our clubs started going to the wall, then we can do something about it. We can rip up Scottish football and start again, for I'd rather see that than continue for another twenty years with what we have now.
More from Andrew Southwick:
