“Anyone read Michael Grant’s article in The Times? Only saw a pull-quote but the headline is about not everyone cheering for Celtic to European success since the financial windfall will put them too far ahead of the other clubs. It’s that old UEFA distribution thingy. Auldheid had a sensible alternative a while back.”
Thanks Danish Pastry for giving Big Pink the opportunity to nudge me (over a coffee I paid for – so how’s that for redistribution of income? 🙂 ) to blog again on the issue of redistribution of UEFA money whilst he was advocating gate sharing as an alternative.
I recall the redistribution debate being discussed on the first TSFM podcast Episode 1-01 of 9th Feb 2014 which can be found here:
https://itunes.apple.com/gb/podcast/scottish-football-monitor/id817766886?mt=2
Listening to it again (I used “View in I Tunes”) I heard many of the recent comments on the previous blog being made in that podcast at or around:
9.58: The interdependent nature of the business of football. Why it is different from normal business.
10.50: Celtic/Rangers leaving the Scottish League making it immediately more competitive.
11.30: Clubs as a community resource (like museums or libraries not run for profit, providing a community service and staying solvent).
12.48: People have to let go of the notions that they have held about the nature of football and recognise it is a totally interdependent business.
13.55: Changing the Champions League format to European and Regional Leagues and raising the standard of all, not dropping standards of one to bring about competiveness.
25.50: A rethink at the top level with NEW thinking about redistribution of income using Champions League money.
27.50: The human dilemma.
So rather than repeat what was said originally and very well developed in the comments on the Michael Grant article on the previous blog, I thought I would look at what I think is the greatest barrier to change which was the last item above – the human dilemma. *
Modern football reminds me of a description of a scene from hell where a visitor looks into one room and sees an emaciated group around a table on which is set a large pot full of stew. They cannot eat because their arms have been set straight at the elbow and elongated so that they cannot get a spoon in their mouths. It is a miserable place. Then the visitor goes upstairs and enters a similar room with occupants similarly handicapped, but where everyone is well fed and contented. “How can this be?” he asks his guide. “Well downstairs all their energies are spent in the nigh impossible task of feeding their insatiable hunger, whilst up here they simply feed each other.”
The analogy is bent a little but not broken in the sense that there are fat and emaciated folk in the football version of the lower room but it is not a healthy place as the fat can themselves become emaciated over time (see Liverpool and even Man Utd) but, generally speaking, self-interest or rather what is perceived as self-interest, holds sway.
Human nature that causes the human dilemma is well reflected in normal business where dog eats dog, then eats the food of the dog it ate if it comes out top dog. Football however cannot exist on a dog eat dog basis because it is interdependent as a business. Dog eating dog is bad for business because over a period of time even the top dog will die of starvation.
Now without abusing the dog metaphor any further and risk attracting dog’s abuse, why is it that something which should be as self-evident as looking after each other is good for business, be such a hard sell?
I said in the podcast around 12.48 that folk need to let go of the notions they have clung on to about football, but why is that so difficult?
Perhaps the resistance to that change can be found, at least in the case of Celtic, who at present are asked in the current debate to make a sacrifice for others, either in the form of gate sharing or giving up some Champion Leagues winnings (if/when they qualify) can be found in the genesis of the club and the memory of that genesis passed from generation to generation.
Everyone knows that the original purpose that Brother Walfrid had for Celtic was to feed the poor in the East End of Glasgow and many of that poor had come from Ireland to be strangers in a strange land.
As a Calton man born in the Gallowgate, as was my grandfather (my dad was found under a cabbage in Well St) I’ve never really identified much with the Irish context of Celtic’s history, although I do recognise its importance to many supporters with Irish family ties, but that dimension adds a further layer to the human dilemma.
Think of it, you form a football club to raise money to feed yourself because you live in an environment where welcome mats are in short supply. That money raised is YOUR money. Your life depends on it as does your family’s as well as your close neighbour (usually in the same close). How prepared are you to share what income you have had to raise yourself with others who you believe have been less than charitable towards you?
Add that folk memory to the human selfish trait of wanting what you spend on football spent on meeting your own desire, which is to make you happy watching an entertaining and successful team on the park and you get an idea of where the resistance to a more equitable sharing comes from and how deep it goes.
I use Celtic here because they are my club and part of my life experience and I have no idea if other clubs experience that added layer of resistance to sharing, if indeed they are in position to share. But if we are ever to be able to introduce gate sharing or what I see as the easier alternative of redistribution of UEFA geld because in not coming direct from supporters pockets it has less of the Celtic folk memory layer to overcome, then those who will be asked to make a sacrifice have to be given the confidence that the aim is not to impoverish them (and the Celtic community memory of poverty and fighting it is as strong today in the form of The Celtic Foundation, The Kano Foundation and the numerous charity events organised by supporters and prominent blogs) but to enrich their neighbours, but doing so in such a way that they enrich themselves. That is the challenge.
In the upper room in the earlier hellish description, the occupiers present the ultimate example of charity in that in feeding each other they feed themselves.
- PS the podcast covers other issues that some 18 months later might still be of interest.
The debate on income disparity that has opened up in the wake of Michael Grant’s article and the Euro match in midweek is I think a very interesting and important one.
Redistribution of income is a very touchy subject where the current practices have become part of the old elephant-tied-to-the-post routine. Before making any progress in such a discussion, we have to have an understanding and consensus about the nature of the sport.
The laws of economic equilibrium could well see the game die totally in my opinion, if we allow the market to dictate its fate.
We all agree that the game is interdependent, but few of us will agree on how to quantify that interdependency. Even Marx had a few thoughts on why that is 🙂
I believe a new blog is coming to us soon in this PRT (post Rangers-trauma) era 🙂 in the hope of stimulating some discussion and thought. I also hope to be doing a podcast very soon on the subject with Jim Spence, so the discussion may well dominate our pages over this next wee while.
Finloch says:
Member: (62 comments)
August 20, 2015 at 1:13 pm
“They want to and need to stay the biggest fish in their proverbial shrinking pond even though business sense would deem a dominant 1 or 2 clubs as being not good for our long term league.”
————————–
Inevitably, in a sporting environment, competitors will strive to outstrip their opponents. You don’t need a sport’s psychologist to tell you that you need to focus on your own efforts if you wish to succeed.
So fundamentally the overall competitiveness of a league is not the concern of individual competitors, it cannot be. This is a concern for the apparently absentee sport governing bodies.
The whole echelonic system of competition had its original aim to bring the highest standards into subsidiary leagues that fed European competition. Celtic or any dominant national league club will have to aim high to compete in European competition and when they return to their domestic leagues their standard will have benefited from this experience. Ultimately the clubs that wish to compete with them domestically will have to raise their game in order to provide significant opposition. This is how the system is ‘designed’ to operate.
The actuality of there being dominant teams within domestic leagues is manifest across Europe and probably further. This is an accident of fate up to a point. In other era’s Queen’s Park or Renton might have been the trail blazers that imported the European competition standards that domestic clubs would aspire to. That it should be the ‘ugly sisters’ that perform this function is an accident of timing and has resonance with a deeper history. I don’t think you can filter out such cultural and historic influences; these are bound to be ubiquitous. Barcelona are a big club because of the strong Catalan allegiance to their own cultural independence. However such accidents of fate and history need not be endlessly enduring. Where are Renton now?
Ultimately we can decry where we are now but this is a self indulgent wallow. Despite all expectations, Rangers may never fully recover their recent historical predominance. Things change.
It is a game. Play the game. Results can turn on meagre decisions. The whole tide of history turns on trivial episodes. No point in decrying Celtic, Barcelona or Rotherham. In a decades time things may have changed and the discussion with it. Hobbling Celtic is not the solution. Scotland needs a club in Europe to import that standard of competition into domestic football.
Sorry castofthousands but I cannot agree with you. There is no other league in the world that I am aware of that is so dominated by one club. This is manifestly bad for all clubs in Scotland including Celtic.
Since Rangers died every club in the SPL has shown increased attendances bar one and there are several reasons for this. The rest of the SPL are now playing with a realistic chance of getting into the Europa league qualifying rounds and possibly getting a reasonably glamorous tie which the public want to see, we all know that Celtic will win the league again this year, and next, and next, ad infinitum (unless Rangers can find a sugardaddy who actually has some cash and is daft enough to hand it over). Every fan and club knows this, no matter how much lip service is paid to challenging Celtic. Celtic can import as much of the European standard of football as they want but none of the other clubs can afford it and therefore the best players will never come to Scotland to play for Celtic, or Hearts, or Aberdeen etc.
If you were a top player would you go to a club that are only challenged when playing in Europe (with champions league football getting more and more difficult to secure each year)? I very much doubt it.
This is not about Celtic. This is about professional football surviving outwith the European Elite. The big problem is Uefa and there bias towards the more telegenic clubs but Scottish football is in a far worse condition than any other league I can think of and this must be addressed by the SFA or Scottish football will die and yes so will Celtic if nothing is done.
Castofthousands – yes, I agree but….there is always a but….TV money changes everything, especially when it distorts to so a degree. I have no doubt that times will change and winners will change but I would rather this was down to footballing alchemists than Rupert Murdoch and his Ilk.
So for me the UEFA monies should go to the National Associations of competing nations and divided on a pyramid basis – of course this would require competent national associations…. But for me the euro riches must be shared more equally otherwise our sport will suffer a fool’s death – I type this as someone who’s head wants
Oops! as I was saying… As someone who’s head wants Celtic to qualify on Tuesday for the £20m, my heart would rather we played in the Europa cup for competive football. £20m to Celtic, subject to getting humped, and then completely skewing football economics in Scotland? I believe the economic consensus now is that trickle down economics is a big fat lie.
The calls for an equitable split of money is an interesting topic.
It has been stated recently that teams in the Premiership could receive about £200k if, and for me it’s a big if, Celtic make the Champions League group stages.
As a separate question does this mean that the teams in the EPL are going to be rewarded by splitting £6M-£8M every year?
You see they are currently guaranteed three automatic entrants with the possibility of a fourth. So they automatically get more cash out of the pot, get more cash from domestic TV, and because of the way European money is dispersed, they also get more of that as well.
In the vicious circle of life this ensures that, while Scottish clubs evenly distribute money regardless of how other countries behave, we could quickly kiss goodbye to any European cash at all. We would simply be left behind.
Questions remain over why should clubs give up their earned prize money to support a club who continually runs at a financial loss?
If there are no checks and balances, and currently there are none, then that is a recipe for disaster; a club takes money from a well run club while buying players it cannot afford in an attempt to usurp the well run club. Yes that makes perfect sense and is guaranteed at some stage to return us all to 2012.
Ultimately, as our administrators currently cannot be trusted, then there is simply no possibility of any proposal like this being approved. We could not trust them to distribute the money correctly or ensure any adopted rules and regulations were followed by clubs prior to this money being distributed.
There is also the question of stadium upkeep, repairs, and ultimate reconstruction. Could a club, with a large average attendance, that is qualifying for European competitions be allowed to retain cash for these purposes.
Under these proposals money flows away from the clubs qualifying for Europe as their costs increase. Players receive bonuses for qualification, shareholders may be due dividends, travel and accommodation costs rise.
I believe the distribution of money, while admirable, will ultimately leave our sport worse off in the longer term simply because we will be the only nation doing it. While other clubs in other leagues reinvest their revenue we will be making our clubs relatively poorer in comparison to their European competitors.
easyJambo says:
Member: (733 comments)
August 21, 2015 at 6:16 pm
tayred says: August 21, 2015 at 5:13 pm
Got me intrigued. What happened in 1981?
====================
The end of gate sharing for league matches.
————————————————–
Ah! The day the music died. Way overdue that this is revisited.
You can’t have a match without the visiting team. Financial recompense to the visiting is due.
Unfortunately my team can’t accept this – sad!
Outside Celtic, we, arguably, take the biggest away support anywhere.
Baffles me why Milne and Duncan Fraser are blind to fixing this.
70/30 split of all gates … makes sense!
Big Pink says:
Moderator: (366 comments)
August 22, 2015 at 12:30 am
‘Not boring at all Ian. I think your stories remind us that football isn’t necessarily the tribal pursuit many believe it to be.
‘ianagain says:
Member: (686 comments)
August 21, 2015 at 11:56 pm
‘ My Gers fanatic mate came to Motherwell v Aberdeen where we met an interesting couple from Aberdeen who travel about to Dundee utd Man U and Aberdeen games.’
_________
And I think that most of us can relate to that.
At least, those of us who in the course of earning their living have had to move to different parts of this country, or England, or elsewhere.
I lived and worked in Carlisle.Went to see Carlisle United.
I lived and worked in Dublin-went to see Bohemians and/or Shamrock Rovers.
Being of the generation for whom football was in itself interesting,whether as a school-boy or college-student player,Saturday was incomplete unless I myself either played a game of some sort, or was able to go and watch others playing.
Team ‘allegiance’ was still important, but was not the be-all and end-all of life.
The sport is the thing, really.
I think we all know that.
And that’s why we got so justifiably upset at the long-term cheating of one club, and the even worse failure of our Football authorities to deal appropriately with that cheating.
And with their continued refusal to uphold any notion of Sporting Integrity.
Like the ostrich, they have stuck their head in the sand in the hope that it will all go away.
And it is a poor reflection on the SMSM that they, for less than worthy reasons, did not, and do not, give that exposed arse the kicking it deserved and deserves.
The damage done to Scottish professional Football is far-reaching.
Until our Football Governors own up to having got it wrong, they will be hollow men, spouting meaningless and insincere platitudes.
Like Blatter.
They must be made to recognise their mistakes, apologise for them, and literally set the record straight.
If they don’t, they will be spitting in the eye of every professional football player who thinks his honest sporting efforts are worth while, while cheats walk off with the honours!
justshatered says:
Member: (145 comments)
August 21, 2015 at 11:51 pm
Justshatered
I have an observation and a question about your post.
You argued against redistribution of resources (whether talent or cash) within clubs in Scotland on the grounds that the authorities cannot be trusted. I think that almost everyone who reads this blog would have a similar view on the SFA/SPFL.
My observation is that the incompetence of players who wish to maintain the status quo isn’t really a valid argument in a discussion about what the appropriate, better model could be for the future of Scottish football. ‘The SFA/SPFL cannot be trusted.’ could therefore be used as an obstacle to any proposed change for the better.
I’d argue that pretty much any discussion on here about change in Scottish football should assume that the first pre-requisite is change at the SFA/SPFL (driven by the clubs we all support, of course).
My question is what you think should be the measure of whether Scottish football is successful. You seem to imply that the success of our teams in Europe is they key measure. I would agree that it is an important measure, but I’d argue that a thriving, competitive, growing domestic league set up is the best goal for the good of the game overall.
I think, but cannot prove, that a healthier and more competitive domestic league would be likely to improve the overall competitiveness of Scottish teams in Europe and also the national team in international competitions.
Almost everyone on here supports a club, but we all love the game. I genuinely believe that the only meaningful goal should be how to achieve a healthy, competitive domestic league set up that benefits all clubs. But, then again, I do not support a club that has any realistic change of winning the SPFL Premiership within my lifetime.
I hope that you can accept that my views are genuine and not just based on a desire to implement a system that would make my own club stronger.
Thinking outside the box, AFL in Australia have initiated a free entry for kids up to fifteen. The assumption being, interest at a young age and hopefully keep the supporter for life. A wonderful idea and one which may also entice adults to take their children to matches. It’s a wonderful sight to see young kids with their faces painted in the teams colours. It may also nullify the hatred and division shown by many supporters, not excluding bad language, to the other support, making it more of a family occasion.
The cost of visiting football grounds has stopped many supporters from attending. This model, tweeked where necessary to suit the particular matches or stadia, would go a long way to enticing many fans lost to the game through economic hardship or broken marriages, back to the Saturday (or Sunday) of old.
An idea worth exploring and pursuing. The Aussie version is called Funday Sunday but marketers could think up a punchy slogan to implement the Scottish version.
Thoughts please
Auldheid, your spoons tale made me smile and your focus on The Human Dilemma is spot-on.
A Human Dilemma made worse by Money and the relentless quest to get more and more.
And further complicated too by a bunch of egocentric characters exacerbating the excesses at every turn.
I think Scottish Football is in a situation where without some big changes from both outside and inside that all we will be doing is managing a slow long-term comparative decline.
Yes there will be good times along the way.
Exciting kids coming through.
Scotland performing under an able manager.
Our last two cup finals.
The renaissance of Hearts.
Even the cup exploits of Spartan and other minnows.
So its not all bad news always but our game is in comparative decline from where we were and where we probably want to be.
The outcome is we will be heading towards a world where more and more of us and our kids will have a Big Team on the telly and a Scottish Team too.
(Just the same way that Highland League Fans where I grew up had a Highland League team and a Big Team (usually from Glasgow) and often an English team as well).
This situation is nothing to do with needing a strong Celtic and Rangers.
Forget that as a solution of any kind.
In fact Rangers were a casualty of trying to compete at the top level without the resources needed.
No the reality is Scottish Football has been cast aside by accelerating events internationally, the inherent dominance of the giant clubs from a few richer countries and the incompetence of the smaller countries to see what was coming and combine to block the changes.
We are not alone however and a cursory glance at the finalists of the Champions League/European Cup finals would say that last time a (now) Diddy European club from a Diddy European country were there was ’90-’91 with Red Star Belgrade.
That is over a quarter of a century ago and I was still playing football.
And my cursory glance at the finalists identified other Euro-Diddies who I doubt will ever get back to the final including: Stade de Rheims, Celtic, Feyonoord, Partizan Belgrade, Panathinaikos, Ajax, St Etienne, Malmo, and Steaua who gave us the worst final ever.
So we’ve seen an evolutionary change at the top that has huge impact and favours 4 or maybe 5 countries rendering other countries and clubs as second class members.
It is a Europe wide problem but I am not aware of anything that the Diddy Country Associations are doing to stop it because I think the fact is the 4 or 5 big countries need the Diddy countries too.
Changes in how UEFA manage their money spinning competitions is one thing we should be fighting for.
And it is a huge and urgent need.
We need to organise internationally and fight for equitable change.
At the same time we also need to think about how we manage our own football structure in Scotland.
Despite what some fans might think Celtic are not the enemy here.
They have European aspirations and to compete, no, not compete – just to qualify as rabbits for the group stages they need every cent they can harvest and a scouting system that allows them to punch above their weight as often as possible.
The fact that in doing this they consign our SPL league to a fight for runners up spot is not Celtic’s fault.
And at the same time our other clubs are simply trying to survive in a changed world where some today pay less to their players than teams in the 4th and 5th level of the English system.
The game in Scotland and across Europe is a bogey and the solution will not come from the 20 or so or so Euro-Giants who just want to get bigger to compete with each other.
It won’t come from our SPL clubs either with their ideosyncratic voting structure and historic alliances.
It doesn’t seem to be coming from either our well paid administrators or those in other nations who have also been disenfranchised.
And the result is a kind of impasse.
An impasse where our press and administrators seem to think the solution is the return of the Blue club.
Football is in an ugly stalemate where for a while at least the big and dominant will get more dominant.
A whole system moribund by The Human Dilemma.
An unsustainable situation where Euro-Giant Clubs and Countries continue to grab all the food on the high table leaving the rest of us to survive on the crumbs.
Cygnus X2 says:
August 22, 2015 at 1:55 am
Of course you make valid points in the quest for a relatively level playing field. We all want standards to rise however the term ‘to stand still in football is to go backwards’ is a well made point but what is being proposed here is not to stand still but to actually go backwards.
The distribution of wealth only becomes feasible if you have something to distribute. One or two clubs qualifying for Europe only to see that income removed from them, thus handicapping them for future years against opponents who are not operating under these constraints, is not constructive in my view.
The way the co-efficient of nations contributes to the competitors of European competition makes a mockery of any notion of fair play. The financial distribution model is also a farce in that it is not an equitable split but based upon the population of the nation from which your club/company comes. So if you had say 500 million supporters world wide you would still only receive income based on a population of 5 million.
I do wish to see standards rise.
How it is achieved is another question.
A business model that demands a club qualifies for the group stages of the Europa League puts that club under pressure. I believe that is currently Celtic’s business model. If Celtic fail to qualify then they make a loss but if they do qualify they would have to give a portion of it away. Now that may be solved by Financial Fair Play rules being adopted but there is absolutely no sign of that happening and we all know why.
If a club bounces along in ninth place for ten years and builds a business model based on wealth distribution and then is relegated that model is utterly destroyed and very possibly the club with it.
My contempt for the SPL/SPFL/SFA is almost limitless along with my disgust for most club chairmen but I would not trust them with any cash until they are reformed. That would be a pre-requisite for any future change but I can already see the headlines in the papers of one or two clubs running our game by demanding such change.
This is a complex issue that, in my view, cannot be solved solely within Scotland. The smaller UEFA nations need to demand meaningful change in the way coefficients and financial distribution works. Internally we need to restructure our Administration and bring in strict financial rules before any wealth distribution can, in my view, take place.
I think European football went south with Champions League and Europa. The big teams get to play in mini leagues and are seeded so can and usually do qualify. Thus the rich get richer and the poor stay where they are.
It was always a better competition (in my view) with the European Cup, Cup Winners Cup, and Inter Cities Fairs/ UEFA cup. Firstly over two legs you could get drawn against anyone (see recent 1970s table where Bayern got Rangers (MK 1) in round 2) and a surprise was always on the cards.
However the big clubs saw this as a risk, or the fact you could, if it were today, get a Real vs Barca in round 2 also. UEFA also saw a potential loss of money on a less than attractive final. Again the rich get richer and now a great divide has formed it will take ages to get back to where we were. However rather than distribute income where the rich get 80% and the rest is shared among other teams (thus maintaining the divide but at least helping smaller teams a little) why not go back to the three competitions, make it a real Champions League, make cups worth winning, and enable glory glory European nights by Aberdeen etc getting good moneyspinning draws from day one instead of having to go through 4 diddles to have a chance.
Yes it will still throw up some uncompetitive games but what of the income and night of glory were ICT to draw Real or Bayern?
As for the Fairs or Uefa cup it would then mean people still challenging for a place but with fewer teams able to reach the competition it might make the leagues more competitive to the end and swell crowds in doing so.
However whilst this might help rebalanced things longer term the one thing I believe British teams need to do is skill up their players. Pedro may be great at Chelsea but how many British players can play in Spain. Forget language it is the lack of technical skills that hold them back and, I believe, commitment once they get to 17 or 18. We see many skilled youngsters who seem to lose it at that age and yet in Europe they improve – perhaps lifestyle and diet are also to blame along with too much money!
We still need a strong Arbroath and East Fife though and some administrators who might use their support for Platini to help the smaller nations in a sustainable manner.
Interesting BP
Was the removed post deservedly of this action and if not who moderates the moderators.
A huge and very difficult subject and it’s good to see it getting a fair discussion rising above oor team’s bigger than your team. The advent of revenue generation as a key part of the average fitba fan’s heartfelt performance indicators is relatively new, or it is if you’re my age! It never crossed the collective minds of Aberdeen fans in 83 that there was income being generated from winning the CWC added to domestic success that would differentiate us from anyone else. We just thought the fitba and the glory was great! I’d wager that the Celtic fans in 67 thought the same.
Of course the reason for this wasn’t indicative of anything else except the fact that the “differentiator” was manageable; it was possible for a wider range of teams to be at least within sniffing distance of winning things now and then. If you had a decent crowd, a board with some nous, fluked a good manager and gathered together a few high performers you could have a crack at it even if the “decent” crowd was 15,000. That’s the perfect storm Aberdeen and to a certain extent DunUtd got in the 80’s. As did the aforementioned diddies who used to win the EC now and then.
Cue the me,me,me paradigm shift in politics in conjunction with TV new money in fitba and over the last 30 years we have a status quo where the big teams need to hoover up all the cash and the rest of us have to nod in agreement that there is no alternative to the trickle down theory (scam). Just to be clear; Aberdeen were and are complicit. Unbelievable really but then so are Celtic and, although I’d swap their position in global fitba for ours anytime, they too are fodder for the big boys but at least they win something on a regular basis.
Ah well, it’s a bugger but, just as I still enjoy the good things about living in Scotlandnd/UK/Europe in spite of a political environment I abhor, I’ll be at Pittodrie this afternoon enjoying my fitba. I guess there’s going to have to be some catastrophic failures before we do anything about it. The demise of Rangers could have triggered something but it was too “diddy”, it’ll need to catch the attention of the big players for something to happen.
The subject of gate sharing is a very interesting concept and has folk have said was part of football until 1981 and is part of cup tie football nowadays.
A lot of people are under the impression that all clubs will receive the same amount of gate income under this system whereas in fact the teams with the bigger home gates still get more money than the little teams.
I watch English League Two games as I live down south and have a data set of last season attendances for all 552 league two games. This division had a wide range of attendances with Portsmouth averaging over 15,000 and Accrington less than 1500. You could say the same scenario as the SPFL top division.
Not sure if these figures will format correctly but the five columns are
average home attendance per club
percentage of total gate for each club at present
percentage of total gate for each club under gate sharing
percentage change
name of club
Out of the 24 teams last season 8 were ‘losers’ and 16 ‘winners’
These figures do not take into account prices of tickets just numbers through the gate.
15242 13.58 9.00 (33.73) Portsmouth
8702 7.75 6.35 (18.06) Luton Town
7412 6.60 5.53 (16.21) Plymouth Argyle
6154 5.48 4.92 (10.22) Oxford United
6024 5.37 4.92 (8.38) Southend United
5343 4.76 4.52 (5.04) Shrewsbury Town
5192 4.63 4.36 (5.83) Tranmere Rovers
5108 4.55 4.36 (4.18) Cambridge United
4599 4.10 4.16 1.46 Northampton Town
4376 3.90 3.99 2.31 Carlisle United
4073 3.63 3.85 6.06 AFC Wimbledon
4044 3.60 3.94 9.44 Wycombe Wanderers
3873 3.45 3.83 11.01 Exeter City
3774 3.36 3.72 10.71 Bury
3736 3.33 3.68 10.51 Hartlepool United
3555 3.17 3.74 17.98 York City
3237 2.88 3.51 21.88 Burton Albion
3213 2.86 3.41 19.23 Newport County
3191 2.84 3.34 17.61 Stevenage
3021 2.69 3.34 24.16 Mansfield Town
2864 2.55 3.21 25.88 Cheltenham Town
2041 1.82 2.81 54.40 Dagenham & Redbridge
1998 1.78 2.86 60.67 Morecambe
1478 1.32 2.62 98.48 Accrington Stanley
I think when gate sharing came to an end,clubs still expected a decent income from travelling support to compensate.
The disasters at Bradford and Hillsborough could not have been envisaged at that time. The aftermath of these tragedies brought wholesale changes to football. All seater stadia, all ticket matches etc were introduced. The cost to both clubs and fans was enormous. I think I am right in saying, one club, Falkirk, were denied promotion, because of a shortage in seating capacity. Capacity at all other grounds was also reduced.
I believe many fans became disenchanted with the “hassle” of trying to get a ticket, whereas before, they would quite happily stand in a queue to pay at the gate. As a result, attendances dropped, as the costs of entrance and travelling grew.
I don’t think,despite recent small increases, we are seeing anything like the crowds we used to, or, sadly, ever will again.
I’d like to make one other point on the UEFA Champions League.
The absurdity of the whole system was highlighted for me in last season’s draw.
Manchester City won the Barclays Premier League in season 2013/14. Arsenal finished fourth. City automatically qualified as Champions of “the best league in the world”. Arsenal had to play in the qualifying rounds to reach the group stages,which they duly did.
When it came to the seeded draw for the group’s, however, Arsenal were placed in pot one, City, the Champions, in pot two !
wokingcelt says:
Member: (9 comments)
August 21, 2015 at 11:27 pm
It isn’t trickle down, in football as in real life, what we see are massive transfers from the bottom to the top, with a few crumbs retuned to keep the natives quiescent.
Football is not a competitive market, it is actually a cooperative. All be it a coop which has been skewed to the short term benefit of two clubs. For any team to flourish in Europe, they need to exist in a competitive sporting environment, and here we find the elephant in the room.
The biggest obstacle in my view is not necessarily the SFA/SPFL. It may turn out to be how shareholder interest is defined. In the short term, which is all senior execs really care about these days, the current situation can be claimed as being in the shareholders interests.
Until we return to looking at shareholding as a long term investment, and, not an investment that must bring short term returns, there is no incentive for execs to think beyond a couple of years.
Fixing football, is probably generational project, no exec will even pretend that they think over that sort time scale. I am afraid without some sort of revolutionary change, managed decline, which is what we have had over the last thirty years, will continue 😥
Donegaltim says:
Member: (21 comments)
August 22, 2015 at 2:36 am
Under 16’s free entry at Firhill : has been for a few years now .
I admire your ambition Auldheid. The particle/wave duality of light controversy that has raged in physics over the last 100 years might have proved an easier resolvable paradox but I think sometimes to aim high brings with it an improbability that resolves toward certainty.
Altruism is the zenith of self interest as it dons an impenetrable disguise and has that advantage of surprise so sought after in any audacious endeavour. However altruism is a hard sell since there is always a temptation to cash one’s chips in early.
Capitalism is the art of obtaining payment for that which is freely available. Thus forever the simple human artifacts of existence have become eulogised, valued and eventually commodotised. It is commercially imfeasible to base a business model on selling a product that can be produced at a fraction of the cost by obtaining easily available raw ingredients and combining them simply to emulate the commodity on offer. Yet the plethora of coffee shops that pepper city high streets selling a cuppa for the price of a jar of granules is stark testament that commerce is a many faceted species.
When villagers first spent a Sunday afternoon kicking the head of a decapitated criminal across the fields it could be little imagined that such a pastime would one day have huge economic potential. Highly improbable one might think; yet a certainty given the passage of time. Football was called football not because it was a game played with the feet: No. Such sport (soccer, rugby) was thus dubbed because it did not require a horse. Any self respecting entrepreneur of the middle ages might have invested their wad in some kind of polo match but they would have been well wide of the mark. Commercial success has always involved large slices of luck and has often alighted in the less likely scenarios. However commercial success and the monetary wealth is derives must have some kind of inherent attractiveness since it can be seen that those that fall within its thrall are very reluctant to desert its compass.
Many years ago I seen a TV programme about a guy who had become disgusted about the disparity of wealth in the world. He decided he would set an example by living on the average human income. He divided total global GDP by the population of the planet at the time and maintained a lifestyle thereafter based on the meagre earnings he had calculated. He was filmed in his caravan on a muddy piece of waste ground, heating tins of soup on a camping stove. Thanks to this brave individual’s intervention and the example he provided, we now live in a world where no longer do we suffer the ignomony of starvation or injustice. All is well now and all that was required was that we suppress our natural propensity to be greedy.
Meanwhile in a parallel universe an almost identical tribe failed to generate the existence of such an individual in their society. They continued in their greedy ways and committed injustices and watched significant swathes of their planets population living in poverty and near starvation.
Of course the moral of the story is that in the first instance the planet prospered whilst on the second planet, in the parallel universe, society crumbled and war and pestilence took hold. Except it didn’t.
There is little evidence that leading an ethical existence will bring about good outcomes for the individual concerned or others. Unethical societies can prove just as prosperous. Therefore altruism is a hard sell.
I was told by a colleague in the past of his experience fishing for crab in the Bay of Mumbai. He needed to be mindful of the first crab he caught as it would attempt to escape from the open basket he placed it in. However after he caught a few he did not need to worry. Any crab attempting to escape from its basket would be hauled back by its fellow captives.
And yet more: An old Hungarian proverb. A farmer has a prize bull which dies in unfortunate and tragic circumstances. The farmer is distraught. As fate would have it a passing good fairy sees the heartbroken farmer and approaches him to enquire of his grief. Hearing of the tragedy of the deceased bull, the good fairy offers the farmer a ‘wish’ thinking that the farmer would request that his prized beast be restored to mortality and good health. The farmers request? That the neighbouring farmer’s prize bull should also die.
Such is the human condition. Oedipus, despite a warning of his fate, killed his father and fathered children by his mother. Upon discovering his ghastly errors he gouged out his own eyes. All highly improbable. All part of the human tragedy.
It is not so much of a dilemma as it is an enigma. We can cast about for logical solutions without any real prospect that logic will prove effective. Fate makes fools of us all.
I wouldn’t want to stifle the discussion, indeed I intend to engage with is more constructively in due course. However the counter-intuitive is the least likely solution and the one that promises most chance of success.
Castofthousands says:
Member: (289 comments)
August 22, 2015 at 4:21 pm
It should be noted saying that the Gordon Gekko “Greed is Good” mentality has done an absolutely outstanding job in making Scottish Football what it is today
I think it was the self-same Michael Grant on Off the Ball just there — and pointing the finger at the UEFA model that is not benefitting the many but the few.
I’m not sure all Celtic fans, if the team qualifies, would fancy giving a huge chunk of the UEFA cash away. The club will have earned it and it’s theirs. Full stop.
But can you imagine the effect of Celtic — unilaterally — giving say, 50% of the UEFA millions to benefit the entirety of SPFL clubs? A magnanimous gesture like that would make world news. The goodwill and respect It would bring to the club and to Scottish football would be aff the radar, imo.
On the other hand, when the league body cannot act with a milligram of decency and sporting fairness, why should Celtic or any other club bail them out? After all, we keep hearing that the SPFL is the clubs, and Doncaster is a convenient patsy on whom the blame for all ills can be placed. But can you imagine if the Scottish champions made such a grand gesture? Would there not be a ripple effect?
Back from utopia, there was mention of the fans stranded outside Cappielow as kick-off went ahead. Certainly was shown on Alba. Apparently a last minute change allowed pay-at-the-gate. So along came supporters who then cannot be accomodated by the turnstiles, but kick-off goes ahead? Ooft. Also mention of clubs removing pay-at-the-gate facilities (Kilmarnock & Abedeen mentioned). Ooft. Can’t be that difficult to have a single window selling entry tickets for cash on match day, surely? When you hear stuff like that you think that Scottish football is the Basil Fawlty of sales promotion.
It’s pretty simple isn’t it? Once the genie is let out of the money bottle,it’s impossible to put it back in.
Because prior to the CL,it was feasible for any club in Europe to win a European trophy, if they had a good Manager, who recruited good players….Aberdeen being a great example.
And during those pre CL times,there were always big clubs with more money than the rest, but the game throughout Europe and Scotland was essentially fairer, because the division of wealth between the bigger and smaller clubs was not as great.
So what changed?
Big clubs wanting a bigger slice of the pie and they created an elite group(of clubs) to protect their own interests, that has now became a self perpetuating cartel.
Add in the x factor of massively increasing TV revenues and structure a competition aimed at elites by elites(the CL), which explicitly pays out said revenue disportionately on said TV audiences and what we’re left with is a competition that 6-7 clubs maximum can only ever hope to win….
The rest who are left behind are fighting for scraps from the top table and it is this fight that Celtic(at present) or any other club in Scotland faces……conform or oblivion,it’s that stark.
Deep breath for this one.
Income distribution and the human condition.
Great comments, too many and too broad to respond to in one post.
This is, inevitably, about Celtic, but Aberbrothockians et al too.
Marx was right, self interest will prevail until all are convinced that Utopia has arrived.
This means that Celtic must be convinced that a redistribution of income is in our best interests.
On balance, I think it is.
I understand that the more money we have, the more we can spend on the scouting system and the players that we bring in and so the better the chance we have of that policy, (a good one in my view), being successful.
However, once we have the players, the potential Champions League players,we have to develop them and that is,as John Collins very honestly pointed out, difficult in a league where they are not stretched to show how good they are, how weak they are, most weeks.
We need competition, our players to be tested, to be made to think, to struggle, to improve. We cannot buy what , IIRC B.McNeill called “the genuine article”;each one costs £20M+ these days.We will find the very occasional Griffiths or Wanyama, but that is all we can expect, the rest will be raw.
The point of income redistribution is not to drag Celtic down, rather the opposite.It is,in my opinion,necessary to strengthen the opposition, to create competition and to raise standards.
It will not work of itself. Better coaching, less fear of relegation and better marketing would help too, as would scouting late developers.
Kenny Mac on SportSound would interpret this as a justification for the football Establishment’s efforts to get TRFC back to the top Div. asap.That’s the last thing we need.In my opinion, PL is wrong.
(Help ma boab, I just made soulmates of Kenny Mac and PL ).
That only sucks resources into the mirage, the apparent but ineffectual vision of a powerful “OF”. 4 games, or even 12 as of 4 years ago, is not enough, we need many teams to be strong enough to beat us if we are not good enough.
It is a hard one: to be fair to PL, he is the CEO of a company and to forfeit revenue is not immediately recognisable as a successful strategy in most cases.The slow decline postulated by others above though is,I’m afraid, real and we will suffer more than any other club if domestic standards fall.
We need to use our straight arms to feed the others, because we need the others to be strong for us to grow.We cannot buy CL success; even if we had the money, they wouldn’t come to Scotland. We need to coach, to compete and to be tested.We need a league where competition is keen between many clubs, where many clubs can realistically strive for the top,for European places, cups and maybe a title.
Redistribution of resources from Europe is desirable, but there is nae chance.Turkeys, Christmas.
Within Scotland it is possible.
Why don’t the other clubs vote for it?
Big Pink says:
Moderator: (367 comments)
August 23, 2015 at 11:42 pm
STICKY
As Tris is still away, it falls to me to do the penultimate weekly update.
Funding:
With one week to go we have raised £4100 – a spectacular amount – with around £900 to go to get past the winning post. A bit of a downer this week was that one guy who had donated over £100 took the huff with a mod (not me I might add) and requested a refund, which of course we gave him 🙁
————————————————————————————-
Pink,
Keep up the good work.
I’m sure it must be demoralising to see such petty behaviour on this blog but I’m sure I won’t be the only one who will be saying this > what a selfish f***ing plonker !
This blog needs the mods to keep things in line with its founding principles and 99.99% of us trust them to do this fairly . So to see someone donating £100 then later asking for a refund is shocking !
What a warped mind you must have whoever you are !
I will personally donate another £100 today to cover this loss and I would ask everyone on here that reads this to please dig deep and donate again , even if it’s a couple of quid , to ensure that we get this thing over the line this week.
Let’s give the mods a much needed filup in our show of support.
Cmon folks…..you know it’s the right thing to do .
justshatered says:
Member: (146 comments)
August 22, 2015 at 10:36 am
Justshatered
You said…
Ultimately, as our administrators currently cannot be trusted, then there is simply no possibility of any proposal like this being approved. We could not trust them to distribute the money correctly or ensure any adopted rules and regulations were followed by clubs prior to this money being distributed.
I agree.
You said…
Internally we need to restructure our Administration and bring in strict financial rules before any wealth distribution can, in my view, take place.
I agree.
You said…
This is a complex issue that, in my view, cannot be solved solely within Scotland.
I agree, but it doesn’t mean that we cannot solve the problem WITHIN Scotland. As I said in my previous post, I believe the collective objective should be the vitality of the whole game in Scotland, not just the success of one or two clubs. In my view European success would be the end result of a healthier and more competitive top division, but not the raison d’etre.
Many contributors have rightly mentioned that shareholder interest compels club chairmen to make decisions based on self interest. This is precisely why changes are needed to the overall rules of association. When the framework of the whole game encompasses redistribution of resources (not just money) then chairmen can make selfish decisions, but they exist within an equitable framework.
Setting up the SPL was exactly the wrong thing to do. Ending the sharing of gates was exactly the wrong thing to do.
Our top clubs will perform better in Europe when the play against better players every week of the season. Our top clubs will perform better in Europe if the game’s administrators change the fixture list to give them the optimum amount of time to prepare and recover. Our top clubs will perform better in Europe if the style of football they play in European competition is not entirely different to the football they encounter during the season.
Focusing the same or more cash within the game on the top few clubs in Scotland does nothing to resolve the issues above.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3QtbD5jHK0
A bit off topic but here is a funny but heartfelt rant from a killie fan(be warned a bit of swearing). He mentions it’s going to cost £15 for their next game against Berwick, made me wonder what if cup game entry was all result based? Say you won your last cup game you could charge the full £15 for the next game. If you draw £12(using bookies rules) and if you loose £9. Might make the cups a little more competitive and get more fans to go, just a thought.
Scarecrow666
Re Killie fan
He should be invited to give the team talk before their next game,somehow I don’t think a defeat would follow.
This guy just raised the hairdrier temp up a few notches
Scotland are always now going to struggle to qualify for the World Cup and European Championships, let alone get out of the group stage at the finals. Celtic can hope for last 16 in the UCL if the stars are in alignment, sometimes. Hearts and Aberdeen are shooting for the group stages of the Europa League and usually failing. I can’t remember the last time anyone else did anything in Europe, the old Rangers in Manchester notwithstanding.
So, stuff it. Quit. Call UEFA’s bluff, and FIFA’s, and say, ‘The whole gig is run for the benefit of sponsors who want to reach the widest global audience. There are 5.3 million of us here, so it’s not us. Drink your Amstel, change your tyres, drive your KIA and to hell with your circus.’ No more Celtic in the UCL, no more Scotland at major UEFA or FIFA competitions.
Then make strategic phone call to the Scandinavian cousins, suggest, ‘It’s not really you either, it it?’ and ask them whether they’d go for a new international, trans-Noordzee trophy open to the top four clubs in Denmark, Norway, Scotland and Sweden. Summer football*, four groups of four, two qualifiers from each, straight KO quarter- and semi-finals, final to be played in neutral stadium with each country acting as host on a successive basis (so Copenhagen in year one, Oslo year two, Glasgow or Edinburgh year three Stockholm year four, rinse and repeat with variations).
As other associations locked out of the money loop saw this grow in popularity then they might want to join too: Ireland, Finland, Belgium, others. Our football. Not Amstel’s football.
It would, however, take a lot of balls to achieve this**.
* Yes, summer football with all that implies. Decent grass, less worse weather, a passing game, and players who are not chosen for their ability to get kicked on the thigh during a hailstorm in February.
** Yes, it’s cloud cuckoo stuff but the alternative may well be St Johnstone losing to Sportif Tractor of the Federal Former Turkish Embarrassment of Kurdistan (North) in qualifying round seven of the Europa League in perpetuity.
rabtdog on August 23, 2015 at 5:13 pm
———
Been thinking the same things masel Rab. Makes a lot of sense. Many small nations now completely marginalised. Lots of potential in regional cups and tournaments as an alternative to the UEFA show.
[removed for extreme crassness and crude language – posting privileges now suspended]
I’ll just make sure the door doesn’t hit my []……..Bye!
Rabtdog
I like the idea. As I said in my post I don’t like the top clubs trying to rule the roost when they don’t give a stuff about the rest.
If Regan et al want to kiss Platini then get a pair and make sure we level the playing field. Of course after the “armageddon comment hell might freeze over first but hey ho somewhere the club’s have to open their eyes and extract a digit otherwise the game is screwed.
I still believe we need to go back to European, Cup Winners and Fairs or UEFA cup before the playing field levels but can’t see Platini going that way.
A Scotland and Scanda league might be he way to go – and why not add Benelux too?
I heard today that Rangers (MK 2) have signed Zelalem on loan from Arsenal until January. Not sure why but for those who don’t know him he is on the verge of the first team and very highly rated by Arsenal Wenger.
Warburton obviously using his London contacts but in my view this is a great signing. Whether he performs on a cold weekend in Hamilton is another issue but watch out for him. Brilliant passing game and great prospect – albeit for Arsenal and will get game time while he improves for next season at the Emirates.
I have a feeling that the 41 clubs (and particularly those who said eff all on the Geordie 5) might start wondering about whether or not they did the right thing.
Basically loans are now the way to get around the lack of finance especially with the top EPL clubs having youngsters who are great but not great enough to be in the first team but still better that the Scottish leagues.
BP can you give bank name and address for contributions. Otherwise some of us can’t assist. Thanks but just where wsome ilof us are based
Rabtdog
You may think your ideas are in space but a few years back a guy wrote to Football365 and suggested that instead of the Euro Nations Cup the competition was changed to leagues so top 10, second 10 and so on giving countries like Wales and Scotland a chance to win something and enabling us to avoid useless friendlies and have teams who are of the same level play each other regularly.
Fast forward a few years and UEFA seem to be going in that direction. Why wouldn’t your suggestion work???
rabtdog says:
Member: (67 comments)
August 23, 2015 at 5:13 pm
‘..So, stuff it. Quit. Call UEFA’s bluff, and FIFA’s, …..’
________
Interesting stuff, rabtdog, without a doubt.
But wouldn’t any grouping of National Associations which left UEFA not find itself declared illegitimate both by UEFA and FIFA , and therefore out of scope for UEFA and FIFA ‘services’? And probably taboo for the European and World sports media?
A parallel European set-up without legitimacy might not be any better than what we have, and could end up really de-stabilising the game world-wide.
I’m inclined to feel that it would be better to get the smaller clubs in each national association in UEFA seriously to come together to insist on the changes necessary to spread the money-that they all have a part in raising!- more equitably.
But, of course, I speak from a base of almost complete ignorance. I just know that the present set-up will progressively kill the game in Europe, and even the richest clubs will die a slow death.
Methilhill Stroller says:
Member: (104 comments)
August 23, 2015 at 8:39 pm (Edit)
BP can you give bank name and address for contributions. Otherwise some of us can’t assist. Thanks but just where wsome ilof us are based
_________________________________________
Details on the “Donate” page MHS – but just or you 🙂
Send donation via bank transfer to
Name: Scottish Football Monitor
Sort Code: 09-01-28
Account No: 84103108
Please include your SFM nickname in the reference so we know who gave us the cash.
John Clark
Wouldn’t be necessary to call FIFA’s bluff. just UEFA’s
I may be wrong, but I don’t think that UEFA is a legislative body in the game’s structure – except for legislating to administer their own competitions. Therefore leaving UEFA would not constitute a breach of any laws. FIFA and the SFA are the governing bodies which pertain to Scotland.
Remember that the main reason the CL was established was because UEFA were terrified that the big clubs who wanted it would go off and start their own competition. Even big clubs would find that impossible if FIFA did not recognise any new structure, as bans from international football would not have sat well with many players.
RabT’s idea is a sound one, and to some extent mirror’s David Heath’s “Atlantic League” idea from 2000.
I’ve put together a wee table and chart that aims to illustrate the competitiveness of Scottish Football.
Statisticians have a thing about excluding ‘rogue’ values and in homage to this dictat, I have made a comparison between the second top and the second bottom teams in the league
I’ve used the top division to illustrate because I did.
Gate sharing ended 1981. 3 points for a win introduced 1995.
I’ve kept it simple for clarity.
Can’t attach Excel file via WordPress so have copied to ‘Word’.
More to follow as the discussion progresses.
Source for data : http://spfl.co.uk/premiership/archive/
Good Evening.
Somewhat off-topic, but if you are interested in a wee insight into the perspective of the media, have a look at @martin1williams timeline on Twitter tonight. He reacted to one of my comments and all manner of banter ensued. He suggest we raise funds and go to court to proved that Sevco isn’t the original Rangers!
THE CLUMPANY. am willing to bet many fans would dig deep to finally get clarification on the issue as well as exposing the sfa on the tribute act.
ok am stating the obvious here but the redistribution of cash has to happen in every league throughout the world for it to work.to do it in scotland alone am sure many would agree to be a pointless exercise unless we are prepared to leave the european competitions to save face IMO.
ok am stating the obvious here but the redistribution of cash has to happen in every league throughout the world for it to work.to do it in scotland alone am sure many would agree to be a pointless exercise unless we are prepared to leave the european competitions to save face, IMO.
signing out.
Methilhill Stroller says:
August 23, 2015 at 8:39 pm
BP can you give bank name and address for contributions. Otherwise some of us can’t assist.
…………………..
BP, not realizing that Tris was away from his post, I sent him a message last week indicating that my bank requires a name and address for your bank’s head office and for your bank’s local branch, as well as a street address for TSFM and a “Swift code” in order to transfer funds to Scotland for a donation. It will be easier (and less expensive) to simply send a cheque once TSFM has an office address, so I eagerly await your news (hopefully this week).
Hats off to EddieGT, btw, for replacing the ‘missing’ funds (ie funds donated, but later withdrawn).
Clumps, there really is no need to spend money proving self evident truths to Martin Williams. You simply tweet page one of the most recent Liquidator’s Report, with Rangers prominently mentioned, along with the helpful Co Reg No SC004276, which, as most of us know, was granted in 1899. This gave a 113 year period during which somebody could have come up with a cock and bull story about that not really being the football club. They didn’t.
Mr Williams was sufficiently enthused about a piece he had written for the ET and, I think, The Herald (I read neither), that he tweeted details last Friday. It concerned the retail agreement now in place between RIFC and Sports Direct. It detailed a 2006 deal between RFC and JJB Sports. No mention was made as to why this contract is no longer in place.
A little more circumspection might have led Mr Williams to ponder which signatory represented the Titanic, and which the iceberg, in this uniquely disastrous arrangement. Circumspection, alas, is a foreign country to Mr Williams. As is the concept of liquidation.
TheClumpany says:
Member: (130 comments)
August 23, 2015 at 11:03 pm
He suggest we raise funds and go to court to prove that Sevco isn’t the original Rangers!
motor red says:
Member: (38 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 12:10 am
THE CLUMPANY. am willing to bet many fans would dig deep to finally get clarification on the issue as well as exposing the sfa on the tribute act.
———————————————————————————————————————
I’ve often wondered if it would be worthwhile taking the matter to court, for several reasons, not least of which would be the small matter of winning the Euromillions jackpot to fund a court case.
Then I would worry about the extraordinary number of times that extraordinary decisions have been made in favour of the Ibrox institution – decisions which were baffling in their absurdity. You know only too well what I’m referring to so I’m not going to list them all, but LNS’s ‘no sporting advantage’ lunacy allied to Bryson’s verbal gymnastics in interpreting what only he alone could manufacture to be the truth are but two examples of why I would not be in the least bit confident of winning a court case against this corrupt little nation’s favoured club(s).
Talking of courts, below are facts which emerged from a court hearing. Shouldn’t our football authorities be acting on these appalling charges and stripping titles where appropriate? After all, if these and many other actions had been carried out by a ‘diddy club’ you can bet your bottom dollar they’d have been unceremoniously launched from Scottish football for it!
“The overall impression created by the Witness Statements from the Murray Group senior employees and Mrs Crimson of the trustee company, was one of guardedness and careful omission of salient facts.”
“The enquiry commenced in January 2004 and it was not until April 2008 when sufficient information became available (but not through the Appellants’ disclosure) for prior year assessments to be raised. The protracted and chequered course of the enquiry was largely due to a lack of candour and co-operation from Mr Red, who was the chief officer dealing with the enquiry.”
“Key documents such as the side-letters, calculations of figures of contributions, emails and memorandums related directly to the trust’s operation were not disclosed, despite repeated requests and statutory demands for information.”
“It seemed that when the inconsistency between his oral and written evidence could not be explained away, Mr Red resorted to attributing authorship of the correspondence to a third-party of whom he could not be specific. The overall impression created by Mr Red’s evidence, oral and written, was that he was being vague and evasive. It was clear that he was not on sure ground, because he was trying to tell a version of how the trust scheme should operate, rather than the version as it actually operated.”
“The conduct of the Murray Group in general, and Mr Red in particular, in the course of HMRC’s enquiry went beyond the description of ‘a lack of candour’. It would be judicial to conclude that it had been obstructive and obscurantist, and there is evidence of active concealment of documents, as the Respondents submit. Equally, to describe Mr Red as ‘somewhat defensive’ in giving his sworn testimony (para 10 MD) would be an understatement. On more than one occasion, Mr Red had attempted to mislead the Tribunal.
TheClumpany says:
Member: (130 comments)
August 23, 2015 at 11:03 pm
Good Evening.
Somewhat off-topic, but if you are interested in a wee insight into the perspective of the media, have a look at @martin1williams timeline on Twitter tonight. He reacted to one of my comments and all manner of banter ensued. He suggest we raise funds and go to court to proved that Sevco isn’t the original Rangers!
—————-
No need for any court case. It’s a nonsense suggestion as is MW’s stance. These sports jounos really don’t come across as being particularly intelligent. The whole thing is a wind up. Desperation no doubt, since he’s flip-flopped on the issue of the demise of the club. This stupidity will be the end of Sevco, since it’s rubber-stamping any Charles Green type patter merchant to come in and make loads of dosh on the back of the myth they are all desperate to believe is true.
The quotes from the article about the phoenix club in England were spot on Clumps.
PS People also pay a lot of money to people who promise contact with the spirit world. Perhaps try that instead of the courts. Knock once for yes, two for no 🙂
Sadly I think football has become too monetized for equality to be a consideration of the powers that be. Wages, ticket prices, agents, TV money and ratings, sponsorship and transfer fees are the most important things in football now. Fans are viewed as consumers buying into brands and are treated accordingly.
For me proof of this was when my father gave up his Rangers season ticket a few years back. He’d been attending matches his whole life and a season ticket holder for the best part of 30. He received an automated phone message from Rangers reminding him that he had not renewed. How difficult would it have been for someone to pick up the phone and find out why? I’m sure this must have happened to a few people.
I agree a break away European league of the ‘smaller teams’ could be a way forward. I would always want to see the individual national leagues protected and continue with a European league designed around them. Just leave the big five leagues to hoover up all the CL places and money. I’m sure none of them would be overly bothered about such a situation.
A friend from uni was a Brann supporter and mentioned the ‘Royal League’ to me. It was a tournament between teams from Norway, Sweden and Denmark. A kinda Scandinavian CL. It’s not around now but I wonder if Danish Pastry has any more information on this.
Some good stuff over the weekend. I know one poster was worried that we are letting our eyes stray from the task of holding the SFA/SPFL to task, however I think that without some moves to fix this Euro issue frankly there will be little left to worry about given another 10 years or so. Also the dismay at the arguing of last week – we are passionate about what’s happening, personally the arguments are great, as long as we behave (apologies again 😳 ). I think we all respect each other enough to know its nothing personal.
Rabtdog’s suggestion of telling UEFA that we are leaving, is I think about the only valid means left to the smaller nations. Even if the smaller clubs/nations got together to take a stand, I think the only outcome would be the bigger clubs telling UEFA that they will leave and form their own competition should the current financially screwed model be changed. They might throw the smaller clubs a token gift just to keep them quiet, but that will be all.
I was thinking over the weekend of the potential outcomes. Before reading Rabtdogs suggestion, I assumed it would end with the big clubs setting up or demanding from UEFA their own competition, and tried to work out the implications for your average big club invited to join. Firstly, costs will increase, travel (Scotland, being on the periphery of Europe is at an immediate disadvantage where this is concerned), increased quality of players required etc etc. I don’t believe any league will be able to bring in much more money than they already do from TV. Subscription numbers would surely be hit once the chances of your club (that’s gonna be the case for 90% of fans surely!) being involved are essentially zero for a start. The sense I get from talking to people is that they are already increasingly fed up subsidising the mega-rich football world and are pulling or minimising the costs of their subscriptions. I cancelled my Sky subscription years ago and really haven’t missed it (Mrs Tayred admittedly wasn’t so keen! A promised Bones box set helped me out of that one).
Obviously fans, as always, are going to have to fund the rise in costs. Increase in ticket costs, programme costs, catering, replica kits etc etc. A big (but not massive Barca-style behemoth) national club attracts a subset of their fans because it is very successful (not all fans I know, but a good number). Now it finds itself outside the cosy environment of its national league, that success is gonna take a big hit. Will fans stay and be willing to pay extra to watch their team struggle? You also lose the joy that is the away game in the rivals stadium, away games suddenly become major costs to fans. They simply ain’t gonna go to many (especially if the team isn’t being that successful).
The national leagues must surely also lock those that leave out of any national competition, Scottish Cup etc.
It may be that these fans will instead turn to the national league again, looking for their live football fix but at a decent price at their local club. Those national leagues, rid of their once uber-powerful giants might see a dramatic revival. Of course, those fans may well decide not to bother at all. First they don’t travel to away games so they have every second Saturday free and suddenly find they have extra money in their pocket. Suddenly they realise what else they could do with their time and their pound.
What I don’t see is any sustained benefit for those “big” but not massive clubs. It’s a lose-lose in my mind, they in effect become the diddies. I cannot envisage any point at which the Man Utd, Real Madrids or Bayern Munichs of the world decide to start sharing their money. Once they get bored with UEFA-MAX they will turn their attention to forming a world league, or they will start to pray NASA find some extra-terrestrial life so a Milky Way league can develop. Always looking to make more money, but only for them, only so they can afford to sign the next Messi for the price of a new hospital or whatever – it certainly won’t be for the good of football as a sport, never for the good of the sport.
Castofthousands says:
Member: (290 comments)
August 21, 2015 at 10:39 pm
Where are Renton now?
——————————-
——————————–
Renton were expelled from the league before a ball was kicked.
The initial number of entrants for the 1890/91 season was eleven, but Renton to their shame were expelled before the competition, found guilty of professionalism by association. The SFA still forbade professionalism although by now it was accepted in England, and on finding St. Bernards guilty of paying a player named John Ross, suspended them from playing any fixtures. The Edinburgh side disbanded and reformed as Edinburgh Saints in the hope of dodging the ban, but the authorities extended the ban to the new club as the players and committee were unaltered. Renton either ignored the ban or, as they claimed, knew nothing of its existence and fulfilled a fixture against the banned club. The SFA and Scottish League found Renton guilty of breaking the ban and subsequently expelled them from all competitions under their auspices.
from “The Sons of the Rock – The Official History of the Dumbarton Football Club”, by Jim McAllister
TheClumpany says:
Member: (130 comments)
August 23, 2015 at 11:03 pm
Good Evening.
Somewhat off-topic, but if you are interested in a wee insight into the perspective of the media, have a look at @martin1williams timeline on Twitter tonight. He reacted to one of my comments and all manner of banter ensued. He suggest we raise funds and go to court to proved that Sevco isn’t the original Rangers!
_______________________________
That tweet from Martin Williams just shows how unknowledgeable our MSM is. What he suggests is quite ludicrous as it would fall under the US ‘class action’ type case which, as has been discussed here and on RTC many moons ago, not a part of UK law. Quite simply, to take a case to court, there has to be some loss or damage to the litigant before the case would even be considered. No lawyer is going to go ahead with it, no matter how much money was raised, though he might charge you for the benefit of his advice!
What is he suggesting the case might be based on anyway? ‘Please Mr Judge, this football club’s saying it’s the same club when it’s not! We don’t like it, can you slap their wrists?’
The only people who might have cause to go to court over the matter is the RIFC shareholders who might claim they were misled into buying shares. The bear shareholders aren’t going to do that, the large institutional investors aren’t going to do that – because they don’t want to show the rest of the world how stupid they were, plus, as with all the rest, any judge would tell them they shouldn’t have been so stupid as the law is clear on the matter and the buyer should have done due diligence.
In short, regardless of how much such lies annoy us, however unfair it’s perpetuation might be, we, Joe Public, have no recourse to the law in the matter. Only those who have been misled into a loss making situation – the shareholders – might have that, and no one who might seek such justice is likely to have lost enough to make it worthwhile.
Martin Williams, on the other hand, should do his job, investigate and research the matter (a lot cheaper than any court case), and publish the results. If he does that, then he might earn the right to be called a journalist.
THE CLUMPANY said
.Somewhat off-topic, but if you are interested in a wee insight into the perspective of the media, have a look at @martin1williams timeline on Twitter tonight. He reacted to one of my comments and all manner of banter ensued. He suggest we raise funds and go to court to proved that Sevco isn’t the original Rangers!.
id like to suggest we have the biggest lawyer/solicitor firm in scotland to state quite clearly the definition of liquidation and all it entails in a letter of which we then have printed in a national newspaper with signatures attached.please excuse if this sounds a bit naive.
Just opened my daily email from The Herald sports headlines. 1 article on the UCL tie tomorrow and 4, count them, 4 articles on how wonderful things are at Ibrox, 1st class management, top players and emerging ‘starlets’.
An impartial observer may conclude that the UCL is a Diddy tourney and that the real football business is to be found in the 2nd tier of the SPFL!
Maybe it is and I’m just looking at this from entirely the wrong perspective!
BDO should be saying ” how did we miss this “, and asking Martin Williams for some advice !
oddjob says:
Member: (203 comments)
August 22, 2015 at 12:02 pm
I’d like to make one other point on the UEFA Champions League.
The absurdity of the whole system was highlighted for me in last season’s draw.
Manchester City won the Barclays Premier League in season 2013/14. Arsenal finished fourth. City automatically qualified as Champions of “the best league in the world”. Arsenal had to play in the qualifying rounds to reach the group stages,which they duly did.
When it came to the seeded draw for the group’s, however, Arsenal were placed in pot one, City, the Champions, in pot two !
—————————–
The system was changed this season so that the champions of the top 8 countries would automatically be placed in pot 1. It seemed fairly pointless at the time, but I wonder now if this was as done a sop to the increasingly disenfranchised Dutch, since their champions are now in pot 1 instead of 3. The change can only really benefit a low-ranked winner of a top 8 league. Still, anyone in pot 3 or 4 will be hoping to draw PSV.
On the subject of coefficients and seedings, it’s undoubtedly better for Scottish football as a whole if Celtic (and any other Scottish club) get as far as they possibly can. Only by raising the country coefficient can we improve seedings across the board, enter competitions at later stages and possibly have more than one UCL representative.
On that note, and thanks mainly to a bunch of shock results in the qualifiers, if Celtic overcome Malmö, and Maccabi Tel Aviv and Monaco (or, less likely, Rapid Vienna) also win their ties, Celtic will be in pot 3 for the UCL group stage draw.
Out of interest would Celtic earn more points doing OK in the CL or very well (ie. qualifying) from the UEFA?
Smugas says:
Member: (915 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 4:32 pm
Out of interest would Celtic earn more points doing OK in the CL or very well (ie. qualifying) from the UEFA?
———————–
Reaching the group stages of the CL is worth four points, i.e. the equivalent of 2 wins in the EL. Getting through the EL group stage and dropping into the EL from 3rd place in a CL group would probably end up about the same. As it stands, Celtic would be in pot 2 for the EL group stage draw, but would drop to pot 3 if two from Maccabi Tel Aviv, Monaco and Rapid Vienna make it to the CL group stages.
The Final Clumpany Blog? https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/the-final-clumpany-blog/ …
😥 😥
The Final Clumpany Blog? https://theclumpany.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/the-final-clumpany-blog/ …
—————————-
There is nothing to beat an “OBSESSION”when it is driven by a simple desire to find the “TRUTH”
————-
CLUMPANY. post that to martin
jean7brodie says:
Member: (345 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 6:00 pm
‘..The Final Clumpany Blog?.’
_________
No danger of that,I think, jean7.
And even if one ‘obsessive’ were to ride off into the sunset, there are others of us to keep the banner of Truth flying high!
The Martin Williams name rang some bells,so I checked my archives and dug out this email I sent to him about a year ago. Needless to say, like many of his type, he chose not to respond. (What could he have said, other than he agreed with all of my observations? 😆 and types like him are obsessively self-protective!
My email of August 8th 2014
”
To martin.williams@heraldandtimes.co.uk
8 Aug 2014
Dear Mr Williams,
I see you are part of the propaganda machine which consistently distorts the truth in relation to all things to do with RFC(IL) and RIFC plc.
You know that RFC(IL) lost its entitlement to be in the SPL, as a direct consequence of the cheating of its majority shareholder. You know it therefore lost its entitlement to membership of the SFA. You know that it died as a sports entity, existing in the limbo of Liquidation while the liquidators try to clear up the dirty financial mess it left.
You know that a new club, initially called Sevco Scotland was set up.
You know that like any new club, it had to apply for membership of a league.
You know the SPL did not accept the new club.
And you know that only by dint of a dirty wee deal was it allowed into the 3rd division, and subsequently granted SFA membership.
Knowing these things, why not tell the plain, unvarnished truth, instead of acting as a cheap public relations person?
Better still, why continue to work as a ‘journalist’ at all if you have such a cavalier attitude to truth?
You are no Chapman Pincher, and your loss to journalism would be of great benefit to the football loving public of Scotland.
Yours sincerely,
John Clark “
John Clark says:
Member: (1129 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 6:41 pm
______________________________________________
Hi JC
That email to MW is a belter!!!!! I was twitching as I read it 🙂
angusmac says:
Member: (2 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 3:23 am
Methilhill Stroller says:
August 23, 2015 at 8:39 pm
BP can you give bank name and address for contributions. Otherwise some of us can’t assist.
…………………..
BP, not realizing that Tris was away from his post, I sent him a message last week indicating that my bank requires a name and address for your bank’s head office and for your bank’s local branch, as well as a street address for TSFM and a “Swift code” in order to transfer funds to Scotland for a donation. It will be easier (and less expensive) to simply send a cheque once TSFM has an office address, so I eagerly await your news (hopefully this week).
———————-
It will be easier (and less expensive) to simply send a Postal order once TSFM has an office address, so I eagerly await your news (hopefully this week).
John Clark ………. Email to MW 😉 cheered up a very dull Monday 😀 thank you
jean7brodie says:
Member: (346 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 6:00 pm
One of Clumps best, I think 🙂
Does the blog think (how many can remember ‘Does the Team Think? 🙄 ) that Martin Williams is trying to beat Chris Jack to ‘Churnalist of the Year’? I genuinely can’t get over the idea that a ‘journalist’ would suggest that, rather than him doing his job, his potential readers (now more likely ex-readers and never have been readers) should fund a court case of a type not possible in the UK.
Pity he’s not obsessed with finding and writing the truth!
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1170 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 7:38 pm
jean7brodie says:
Member: (346 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 6:00 pm
One of Clumps best, I think 🙂
Does the blog think (how many can remember ‘Does the Team Think? 🙄 ) that Martin Williams is trying to beat Chris Jack to ‘Churnalist of the Year’? I genuinely can’t get over the idea that a ‘journalist’ would suggest that, rather than him doing his job, his potential readers (now more likely ex-readers and never have been readers) should fund a court case of a type not possible in the UK.
Pity he’s not obsessed with finding and writing the truth!
===========================================================
Exactly Aj !
And you would think that by now the SMSM would have learned to keep well away from social media.
The form of Twitter succinctly exposes the sports ‘journalists’ for their lack of knowledge, debating skills, wit…and, erm…writing ability.
And to paraphrase Mark Twain: best to let people think you a fool, than to use Twitter and remove all doubt. :slamb: :slamb: :slamb:
StevieBC says:
Member: (826 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 7:59 pm
And you would think that by now the SMSM would have learned to keep well away from social media.
The form of Twitter succinctly exposes the sports ‘journalists’ for their lack of knowledge, debating skills, wit…and, erm…writing ability.
And to paraphrase Mark Twain: best to let people think you a fool, than to use Twitter and remove all doubt. :slamb: :slamb: :slamb:
____________________________________-
And that is something – another thing – that amazes me about those so called journalists, you’d think their training and experience in a world of the written word would set them up as some sort of twitterati rather than the cannon fodder for ‘internet bampots’ they so often are. Instead they compound their journalistic frailties with attempted put-downs of people their editors should be insisting they do their best to recruit as readers of their newspapers/rags.
If he, and others of his ilk, had the least journalistic skill, he’d write an article setting out exactly what it was that made him change his mind about the effects of liquidation on RFC. And it would have to be more than, ‘a lying charlatan told me so!’ In truth, if what he now claims is in any way true and accurate, it would be a very easy article to write, setting out what he previously believed, and why, against what he now knows to be the ‘truth’, again setting out where he got his U-turn inducing information and why he now believes it, so unquestioningly.
Allyjambo says:
Member: (1171 comments)
August 24, 2015 at 7:38 pm
‘Does the blog think…’
____________
It certainly does,Aj! with you as one of its thinkers!
And I rather like the ‘Does the team think?’ reference.
Although there is a shared understanding among gardeners of what ‘good gardening’ is about,individual gardeners will have issues which they can safely raise for discussion, get some opinions on, engage in friendly disputation, and add to other people’s knowledge while broadening their own.
Similarly, this blog has a ‘blog consciousness’ which is shared by many different people, even though on this or that particular football matter there may be many differing points of view.
We can raise questions freely, solicit opinion, look for support, engage in disputation,have a laugh, learn a lot about quite a lot of things (if we do a wee follow-up on matters discussed)- and we can do all this without vileness , even if sometimes with asperity!
I think we are fortunate indeed to have this ‘shared consciousness’.
With the SMSM as it is, if the blog didn’t exist, we would have to invent it! 🙂
The Clumpany,
Please don’t give up. I love reading your posts and articles every day. In your own way you do a JC to keep the truth out there, but with a barrow load of humour too in your own distinctive style. Sorry folks but he hasn’t a comment page on his own site. But I know he is a regular on here.
STICKY
As Tris is still away, it falls to me to do the penultimate weekly update.
Funding:
With one week to go we have raised £4100 – a spectacular amount – with around £900 to go to get past the winning post. A bit of a downer this week was that one guy who had donated over £100 took the huff with a mod (not me I might add) and requested a refund, which of course we gave him 🙁
In this final week, we will try to post and update on the front page every day as we get to next Friday’s deadline.
Thanks to everyone who has donated so far – and also to those people who have paid money into our new bank account. No PayPal fees involved so that helps even more than usual 🙂
Remember you can now donate via bank transfer, Send donation via bank transfer to; Name: Scottish Football Monitor; Sort Code: 09-01-28; Account No: 84103108
Premises:
We are hopeful that something will unfold by the early part of the week. Remains to be seen, but there are one or two irons in the fire, so we are moving forward.
Ads:
We have signed up with another ad provider who has promised us better results than we are currently getting. The bottom line is that we don’t make any money unless people click on the ads, and the current ads being served are not sufficiently well targeted to entice folk to do just that. The new guys (a company who specialise in sports, and who I have worked with in the past on a football club website) think they will target our audience a little better. Again, it remains to be seen, but we lose nothing by changing since the current earnings are so poor. When we get our premises up and running, there will be a marked increase in our content which will make us a better fit for possible sponsors. That is and always was our medium term aim.
Re the recent debates on the Herald and Martin Williams. I see that the Herald and Times Group are implementing redundancies, which gives me no great pleasure. It also appears to be the case that the print media everywhere is declining.
What I do wonder though is if the Herald and Times have tried and failed with a particular policy in an attempt to reverse, or at least bottom out the decline in sales. I think it is without any hint of paranoia to suggest the group have embarked on a deliberate policy of positive promotion of all things Ibrox. Many of the works of Martin Williams, Chris Jack, and Matthew Lyndsay are nothing short of embarrassing in my view. I guess employing an office junior to copy and paste PR releases on behalf of Rangers would be a way of saving money, rather than paying those three to do it.
In conclusion the Herald and Times appear to have failed to attract their target audience. In tandem I am sure many people have been turned off with such blatantly biased coverage.
upthehoops says:
August 25, 2015 at 7:12 am
While I am sure it plays a part in the falling sales numbers it must be recognised that not everyone in the world is interested in football and, as discussed previously, even those who are don’t delve into it to the same depth as many of us on here. The pap written about T’Rangers is a factor in the ongoing demise of the printed press but only a small one.
The problem lies with the larger problem of more and more people not being taken in by the spin being put on stories far bigger than 22 guys kicking a ball about.
Despite all the fear and smear the rise of the SNP and the Jeremy Corbyn effect all fly in the face of the establishments desire to maintain the status quo.
Today’s internet generation can easily access alternative and more in depth analysis of the issues than has ever been available. In amongst that is some bonkers stuff but folk are opening their eyes all the same, questioning, challenging, making their own minds up.
We can make a start and do our own wee bit for football and possibly other sports but there are issues are far bigger and more important fish to fry.
Sitting at Tannadice last Saturday lunch time a childhood memory came to mind, more years ago than I care to admit! Before I’d even reached my teens I was taken to watch a game of basketball featuring the Harlem Globetrotters. It was entertaining for sure with the Globetrotters unusual combination of sport with a bit of comedy and theatre. But even at the time as a youngster I did reflect that there was something a bit saccharine about the whole experience. Who were the opposition? My recollection is a team provided by the Globetrotters as a foil to their talents, essentially there to make up the numbers, maybe with a role in the entertainment, a bit like the straight man in a comic duo. Fun yes, sporting contest, you’re kidding!
I wouldn’t like to overdo the parallel with Tannadice on Saturday. Celtic were not required to get much out of second gear by a United team whose first half performance was as pathetic as I’ve seen in recent years. But what was unusual for me was that as I made my way to Tannadice I questioned why I was going. That wee spark that normally accompanied the fixture, the long odds hope that United might just get something, wasn’t there. I was turning up for a Tannadice turkey shoot and the turkeys were dressed in tangerine. Ahh, you say look at Killie just a week or two back. Well I take your point but even a draw was just not going to happen! The lower home attendance than normal suggested that many had concluded the same and weren’t bothering to turn up.
The fundamental question begged is a simple one. Why do we go to a match? Arguably for the Scottish Premiership the reality is that the top flight splits into three or more leagues. The battle to win (one team involved) battle for second (maybe two this year?) battle for a Euro spot, battle for top 6, to keep above 11th place etc. So a non Celtic supporter isn’t greatly influenced by the prospect of winning the League. That dream is too distant. But they might pick up the odd point off Celtic to help them beat their rivals in whichever of those Premiership battles they are involved in.
You could equally wonder at what motivates supporters of lower tier teams. For example in Tayside what is it for a supporters of say Montrose, Arbroath, Brechin or Forfar? Is it the prospect of beating your local rivals, winning maybe the 2nd or 1st Div or winning through a cup tie against a higher division team? Or is it the excuse to get together with your mates?
If all this is too philosophical for you then I’ll cut to the chase. We’ve had many debates on this issue (and they go back to fairly early in the RTC days). Ultimately at the higher end football is a business in this day and age and the critical consideration is money. Will the marginalised countries of the Champions League whose clubs will never sit at the top table want to break away? Well, will they make more money? Again in persuading clubs to accept a change in the distribution of income, will they make more money? Because the vision of hell conjured by Auldheid is currently not the reality. The key “players” are getting plenty of food, more than they would expect in a more altruistic scenario.
Considerations regarding where to put newco in the Scottish Leagues were surely driven by money. We need the Glasgow derby! The tv companies want it and pay for it. We need the travelling fans. Why didn’t they come back to the top tier? Money again. So many fans had had enough and supported No to Newco that the bigger business risk came from alienating your own fanbase.
So if money ultimately drives change then the Atlantic League equivalent needs the sponsors and tv deal to achieve “lift off.” In a domestic context as long as the fans are turning up or watching the tv, change won’t happen. I’ve argued on here before that the NFL approach to revenue sharing secured by a far sighted Pete Rozelle in the early 1960s suggests that real competition can increase the overall size of the pie even though it means a smaller individual slice for some but I don’t see much prospect of Peter Lawwell taking such a leap of faith, even if it could be on a limited period trial basis.
No to Newco showed that if enough fans change their behaviour (and threaten income in the process) then the football business will respond. Which brings us back to the Harlem Globetrotters who I see lost 3 games in 5,983 in the 1960s! How bright does the spark of hope that your team can achieve a result need to be or is it irrelevant to why you support them? Will Celtic fans still be singing that they just can’t get enough as they celebrate 40 in a row? I genuinely don’t know. It must depend on why you go and perhaps as importantly why you might stop.
wottpi says:
Member: (717 comments)
August 25, 2015 at 9:04 am
‘…Despite all the fear and smear the rise of the SNP and the Jeremy Corbyn effect all fly in the face of the establishments desire to maintain the status quo.’
______
While in the field of politics Nick Robinson of the BBC was clearly battling for the BBC London, Unionist mind-set ( backed by James Naughtie, or so I read today) our BBC Scotland has been consistently backing the Scottish Football ‘establishment’ by not challenging its actions over the handling of the RFC saga..
On the politics front , in England, there are still a few voices to be heard challenging the ‘establishment’.
In Scotland, on the football front,not one of our media outlets challenges the SFA over its distortion of the truth that they permit a new club to masquerade as a dead club, and used their powers to hide the rottenness of the cheating of SDM, and, by withholding relevant info from the LNS enquiry, minimised the punishment due to the rotten-SDM-RFC (IL)for that sports cheating.
When the BBC itself becomes the story, it’s time to take a long hard look at the political and other allegiances of those who control it.