In Between A Rock And A Hard Place

[ian1964 10,447]

By Gordon Waddell on Jun 17, 12 06:28 AM in

LET me start by saying this: There are no solutions. Only varying shades of s***. So for the good of everyone, it's time to be pragmatic rather than dogmatic.

When your choice lies between decimating Rangers as justice, or decimating your own team as punishment for not doing so, there MUST be a middle ground.

 

So let's try this.

 

Relegate Rangers to the First Division.

 

Bring Dundee up.

 

With the Ibrox team absent, get the SPL voting rights changed. End the stranglehold the insane 11-1 majority gives the Old Firm. With Rangers gone, the power has gone.

 

In its place, you have something resembling democracy which, even if they come back, the Old Firm can't change.

 

And with Rangers only down a division, you persuade Sky and ESPN it's not the end of the world. Stick with us and you'll soon have back your precious Old Firm games.

 

That way, crucially, you protect the central income of the clubs who are left.

 

Gers are still out of Europe for three years and with any sense they'll have backed down to the SFA and have accepted the justice of their original transfer embargo.

 

The pros? They get a sporting punishment and don't just walk back in to the SPL unmolested.

 

The rest of the clubs get what they've been agitating for but could never have achieved with Rangers there, which is a change to their rights. And they haven't had to completely leverage away their souls to do it.

 

Sky are hopefully still on board.

 

You get two up, two down from the SPL at last, ending the self-serving cartel - AND the SFL insist on it staying that way as the price to pay for facilitating it.

 

Throw in a boost for the First Division clubs in terms of revenue, assuming Rangers still have a support. Most of the clubs there are equipped to cope, as opposed to the Third.

 

The cons? It's not inflicting enough hurt on newco Rangers.

 

But think on it this way. It's like punching someone you detest in the face over and over again. Sure, you may derive satisfaction - but is it worth breaking your knuckles?

 

As it stands, all things being equal, from the chairmen and owners I've spoken to, the vote would go against Rangers.

 

But all things aren't equal.

 

They're under serious pressure from their supporters to do the right thing. The fans want Rangers emptied. And it's easy for me, as a diddy club fan, to understand why.

 

Just look at Rangers' support for evidence, threatening to boycott the very clubs who have their fate in their hands.

 

Even in their death throes they can't shake the arrogance they've worn like a tattoo on their foreheads for a century and more.

 

There's no contrition, no apology. Nothing from their would-be owner, from the previous vandals, or from the massed ranks.

 

It makes you want to see them get theirs - and get it big-time.

 

In the background, though, most clubs are bricking it.

 

Privately, they're seeking comfort from the SFA and Sky that doing the right thing isn't going to cripple them - and they're not getting any.

 

Take Dundee United. They get 29 per cent of their turnover from central revenue. Same again from season tickets. The rest is made up of, sponsorship, gate money, commercial income, yadda yadda.

 

For clubs like St Johnstone, the figure for central income is closer to 50 per cent.

 

And there's not one of them, other than Celtic, who could afford to lose the guts of that money overnight.

 

People keep saying to me the Sky threat isn't real - that they'll be there, or there will be a deal in its place.

 

If that was true, the chairmen would be sleeping at night. And they're not.

 

Because it's not as simple as taking it away and saying 'Doesn't matter, just cut your cloth, the game will be better for it anyway'.

 

Maybe it would, but the reality is the clubs have contracts to honour, commitments made on the basis of income forecasts.

 

Players' wages, staff, rent for training grounds - they don't go away, even if you lose 30 per cent of your revenue.

 

Obviously the counterpoint is that by voting yes, they alienate their own fans instead. And they can't afford that either.

 

Which is why a middle ground has to be found for everyone's good.

 

People will say there's no mechanism for the solution I've argued. So what? There's no precedent for ANY of this.

 

Create a mechanism. Speak to each other. Don't treat it like you're in a vacuum.

 

Get David Longmuir, Jim Ballantyne and Stewart Regan in the room with all the SPL types - and make it work.

 

It's not perfect, but nothing is. I'm not even saying I think it's right, because I don't.

 

I'd love them to take the chance to go to a 16-team league, bring in a pyramid, split the revenue evenly, create a football utopia.

 

They'll never going to do it, so we might as well find a halfway house.

 

This way it's a sporting punishment for Rangers, it obliterates the Old Firm's power base in the SPL and the collateral damage isn't apocalyptic. All of which is assuming Rangers survive at all, of course ...

[the gunslinger 3,366]

rangers should just come out and say its all or nothing in terms of penalties. we will fight anything in the middle.

[Max Rebo's Big Blue Nose 0]

Why should the massed ranks, ie. the fans apologise FFS? This had nowt to do with us

[andy steel 0]

Everything that's wrong with the coverage of fitba in one piece.

 

I'm really sick of being stereotyped as a neanderthal by idiots.