Scottish Football looks set for civil war as SPFL chiefs plot to take SFA's powerbase

[ian1964 10,409]

WITH boardroom civil war on the horizon at Hampden, MailSport unearths secret hijack plot and asks 'Has the SPFL gone power crazy?'.

 

The SPFL’s blindside run at the SFA’s powerbase is about two things – control and cash.

 

But the clubs’ push for power could end up costing the game MILLIONS in grassroots sponsorships.

 

The professional clubs would take complete control of the development budget for football in Scotland if they won the day with their resolution.

 

They believe the money could be better spent under their own umbrella and have also made a play to take control of the main board of the SFA.

 

However, big-money backers of the game – like Tesco Bank, McDonald’s, sportscotland and the government-backed Cashback for Communities scheme – base their contributions on the fact that they are all-inclusive and not aimed at the elite end.

 

MailSport believes all of these relationships – plus others with local authorities – would be in jeopardy if the pro clubs took control and ran the game to their own ends.

 

The two boards will meet on Tuesday, brought to the table for the first time in a year to discuss the proposals – and the pressure will be on to avert a civil war in Scottish football.

Revealed: The secret copies of four explosive resolutions the SPFL have proposed for the SFA's AGM.

 

Here’s everything you need to know about the resolutions:

Q/ So what do the SPFL want? The resolutions in a nutshell:

 

 

1. The Professional Game Board (PGB) provides one representative – Celtic’s Peter Lawwell – to the seven-man main board of the SFA but the SPFL want this increased to two.

 

2. Currently the president and vice president of the SFA must have served a minimum of a year on the PGB or

Non-PGB, as well as four years on the SFA Council and have attended a

minimum of eight Council meetings in five years to qualify for a nomination. The SPFL want to do away completely with these criteria.

 

3. The SFA main board control the budget for football development, from Mark Wotte’s performance department to the grassroots programme for kids and coaches run by Jim Fleeting and Andy Gould in Scotland.

 

The SPFL feel the professional game should control this entire pot and want the PGB – in other words, the senior clubs – to take control.

 

4. The main board currently control the ability to elect any club for full membership. The SPFL want that right to be passed to the clubs to approve or veto new members.

Q/ What’s the grand plan behind them, then?

 

Individually, the four resolutions wouldn’t be as threatening but it’s their cumulative effect that could have grave consequences.

 

The end game? The clubs will have two from the PGB on the SFA board plus control of a hand-picked president and vice president – thereby controlling the seven-man board with a majority of four, thus controlling the SFA.

 

The clubs would also have access to the money currently used to fund the development of the game.

 

They would also control future votes by being able to stifle any additional membership requests which would jeopardise their power of veto if they vote as a group.

Q/ Why shouldn’t the pro game be better represented rather than the juniors and amateurs having a disproportionate say?

 

They probably should – but if there are no checks and balances of their powers, is it good for the game as a whole to have pro clubs with vested interests running the entire game from the national team down to the grassroots?

 

If push comes to shove with money and power, who will they seek to serve other than themselves?

 

Q/Okay, but the current system still allows long-term blazers gaining power on the back of nothing but good attendance.

 

Also true, and the SFA main board IS weak – the system does need looked at to allow more appropriate talent to rise to the top.

Q/So this resolution is a good thing?

 

Yes – and no! If there’s no need for office bearers to be time-served, you could end up with flavour-of-the-month fly-by-nights parachuted in by the clubs without any examination of their bona fides or their intentions.

 

It’s possible that we could see some real talent and acumen appointed – but you’re relying solely on the judgment of the clubs to find it.

Q/ What do they need to pass the resolutions?

 

Each vote requires 75 per cent approval from the 94 members.

Q/ Will they get what they need?

 

They’re not speaking for all 42 clubs because a cursory call round indicates they haven’t actually consulted the rank and file.

 

It’s unlikely they would get universal membership approval for all of it – the perception will be that the top 12 clubs will stand to benefit the most.

Q/ Hang on, it’s Mike Mulraney of Alloa proposing all of the resolutions, though?

 

He was one of three lower-league chairmen elected to the SPFL board last summer along with Les Gray (Hamilton) and Bill Darroch (Stenhousemuir).

 

The weight of the Premiership members – Stephen Thomson (Dundee United), Duncan Fraser (Aberdeen) and Eric Riley (Celtic) – will be behind this but having Alloa, Stenny and Accies involved lends it an ‘everyman’ look ... not just being driven by the big clubs for their own gain.

Q/ What about the cash, then – how much is at stake?

 

Hard to put an exact figure on it but so much of it is ring-fenced for specific grassroots and community use, it’s not nearly as much as they think.

 

The irony is the biggest chunk of the performance strand of it – around £2m – is used for Club Academy Scotland. So the clubs already benefit. Just not to the extent they think they should.

Q/Why do the clubs feel the need to control it then?

 

A couple of reasons. They don’t like the way Wotte is running things, they don’t think the performance strategy is worth what it costs, they don’t like the lack of control and input they have over performance schools and, simply, they see money they don’t have and they want it.

 

They still don’t have a sponsor and a lack of cash will see them struggle to fulfil their promise of jam for all down through the divisions. It’s ironic considering the SFA has underwritten the only decent thing they’ve achieved as a body – the Premiership play-offs – to the tune of £1.5m.

 

Q/ Are they right about the performance strategy, though?

 

It’s still early but there is evidence the strategy is having an effect. Scotland won the Victory Shield at Under-16 level for the first time in 15 years.

 

The U-17s have made the UEFA Finals in Malta, winning all three games in their elite round. The U-19s are in the elite round in England next months.

 

The women’s team are well on their way to the World Cup in Canada with a 100 per cent record from six qualifiers, a feat that could earn the SFA close to seven figures.

 

Throw in the fact the national team are back up to No.22 in the world rankings and they have a decent claim to their strategy working.

Q/ But what about the rest of the game outwith the clubs?

 

That’s the big worry. The SFA has overarching responsibility for the game as a whole and its development from the ground up.

 

At last count, there are 130,768 registered players in Scotland from the youths to the amateurs to welfare to the women’s game.

 

Meanwhile, the SPFL’s development branch – Club Academy Scotland, for pro youths from 11 up – sits at 3,185.

 

Throw in the first teams and the clubs account for around three per cent of the football players in Scotland.

Q/ Surely they should be the SPFL’s focus?

 

They are. A working group set up between the organisations is looking at streamlining Club Academy Scotland and clearing out the jersey fillers and creating more ‘best v best’ football at the elite level.

 

However, the clubs don’t like the performance schools and that they have no say in their operation. What some of them do like, though, is the idea of regional academies like the Forth Valley experiment involving Falkirk, Stenhousemuir and East Stirling.

Q/ What benefit is there in the clubs taking on responsibility for the rest of it?

 

Very little, if any. All they see is a top-line figure and pound signs. The problem, however, comes with the fact that much of the money is simply used to leverage other funding.

 

For example, £476,000 is budgeted for a community programme that helps fund 70 coaches across the country – however most of their salaries are paid by local authorities through partnerships with the SFA.

 

These partnerships would disappear if councils thought they were simply funding the professional game rather than its community branch.

Q/ What about the other backers of grassroots football?

 

Their visions all involve inclusivity and community benefit.

 

McDonald’s work with all the home associations and have invested more than £1m every four years over more than a decade committed to growing the game. Likewise Tesco Bank, with £1.2m over the past four years.

 

The government’s Cashback scheme has pumped in £2.2m over three years. On Wednesday, Regan and Fleeting were in the Isle of Lewis to unveil a new facility at Back that has received nearly £500,000 from Cashback, sportscotland and the Big Lottery.

 

These resolutions would leave the pro clubs responsible for this kind of commitment to remote communities. Would they be interested?

The Movers and Shakers

 

The looming SFA AGM is shaping up to be one of the stormiest in the organisation’s 141-year history.

 

Delegates will consider the four resolutions that would effectively hand control of the SFA main board to the clubs. Alloa chairman and successful businessman Mike Mulraney (right) is the name on the resolutions.

 

He wants clubs to elect an extra member to the board – in addition to Celtic’s Peter Lawwell (left).

 

SFA chief executive Stewart Regan (far right) has a fight on his hands.

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/scottish-football-looks-set-civil-3434596

[der Berliner 3,231]

As an FFer pointed out ...

 

Come on who are they trying to kid, it's a phoney war. Liewell, Regan, Doncaster, Riley and the other Celtic minions have been plotting this since before Regan was head hunted by the vhermin. These plans will get passed easily the rest is just window dressing.

 

Sporting integrity ... well well.

[der Berliner 3,231]

"One club to rule them all ... and in the darkness bind them."

[RANGERRAB 3,254]

"One club to rule them all ... and in the darkness bind them."

 

Not necessarily. If enough clubs oppose this it won't happen.

The SPFL doesn't have enough money to meet its obligations. It cannot get a sponsor for its leagues and has a derisory TV deal in comparison to other leagues around Europe of similar stature.That's why it's trying to hijack the SFA to gain access to its finances in particular areas such as youth development.However as the article says these funds are for the community in general and not at football clubs so you have to question the wisdom behind this.

On another issue I see the Dundee chairman has said the current TV deal only allows 18 televised Championship games next season.WIth us, Hertz, maybe Dundee, Dunfermline and maybe a club like KIllie or HIVS dropping out the top division then if the TV companies want to broadcast more than 18 championship live games then it'll be interesting to see what happens if the championship clubs demand a greater share of the TV money......

[compo 6,103]

neil Doncaster will then be el supremo

[ian1964 10,409]

SFA AGM: George Peat criticises proposals from SPFL that could see clubs take control of multi-million pound grassroots development budget.

 

THE former SFA president says he is shocked by the plans and voiced concerns that money would stay in top league.

 

GEORGE PEAT last night slammed SPFL plans to grab SFA cash – and placed a massive question mark beside the motives of their apparent U-turn.

 

The former SFA president was shocked by revelations of four shock resolutions the league body have proposed for the SFA AGM next month.

 

Should the proposals be voted through, clubs could take control of the seven-man main board and the multi-million budget for grassroots development, used to set up and fund the Performance Strategy that was recommended in the Henry McLeish report.

 

Since the implementation of the recommendations and appointment of performance director Mark Wotte, results at almost all youth levels have improved drastically.

 

Peat, who commissioned McLeish to compile that report on the state of the Scottish game, insists the former First Minister’s findings were backed 100 per cent by the clubs at the time and is staggered they are the now the same ones pushing for change.

 

He said: “I told Henry McLeish at the time we at the SFA would accept all his recommendations. Every club at the time unanimously backed his recommendations. Now, after three years, some people are trying to change things.

 

“The SFA acted on the recommendations and appointed performance director Mark Wotte and all his staff and all the teams underneath him.

 

“They are now showing signs of improvement and the McLeish Report was done to change things for the better. Having changed it and see it beginning to bear fruit in the performance of our national teams at all levels, why knock that?”

 

Peat has his clear suspicions and added: “Our last television deal at the SFA got us an 85 per cent increase in terms.

 

“The SPL, at that stage, had their TV deal collapse. Now they are short of money and the way I read it, they are trying to cash in on the good deal the SFA got.

 

“Because of that good deal the SFA got, we were able to introduce the performance director and his staff.

 

“The bit that annoys me is they are trying to cash in on this, having agreed in the past three years to go with what was in the report.”

 

The move has been headed up by Alloa chairman Mike Mulraney and seconded by SPFL board members Bill Darroch of Stenhousemuir, Celtic’s Eric Riley and Hamilton’s Les Gray.

 

But Peat has his doubts and said: “To be honest, when I see some of the names mentioned, they are being used.

 

“If anybody in their right mind thinks that if the SPFL got their hands on the SFA cash it would go right down to the bottom clubs, I’d imagine they would be sadly mistaken.

 

“The bulk of any money they get their hands on would, as far as I’m concerned, stay in the top league.”

 

Hamilton fans' chief: Clubs should be able to access SFA cash reserves

 

CLUBS should have access to the SFA’s cash reserves for youth development says Hamilton fans’ chief John Paterson.

 

Accies chairman Les Gray is one of the SPFL rebels looking to seize control of the national game along with Celtic’s Eric Reilly, Stenhousemuir’s Bill Darroch and Alloa’s Mike Mulraney.

 

The clubs want more power on the SFA board and control of the finances feeding into the game’s grassroots.

 

Paterson said: “There is a lot of disagreement about the way forward especially with the youth game.

 

“Clubs such as Hamilton have shown the way with their youth set-up but the costs are very high.

 

“These clubs are at the heart of their communities and if they could control the cash they might be able to put more money into facilities and coaching.

 

“Hamilton brought through players such as James McCarthy and James McArthur – look how well they’ve done.

 

“I watched Everton’s McCarthy run the show against Manchester United and that was down to Accies rather than the SFA.

 

“The SPFL is still in its infancy but the SFA haven’t exactly covered themselves in glory over the years.

 

“A lot of fans will be thinking both organisations are as bad as each other.”

 

Alloa chairman: 'Changes seem obvious so why not make them?'

 

ALLOA chairman Mike Mulraney insists the SFA’s old boy network stops the right type of talent from getting to the important roles at the top of the game.

 

The SPFL board member, whose resolutions to the SFA agm have rocked Scottish football, wants the obligation for those elected to have been in the game for years removed.

 

He said: “Senior football was rightly criticised for not making changes but no one can say we’ve not grasped the problems. And an element of modernisation into the SFA – and remember we are members of the SFA – is appropriate at this time.

 

“They have rules that seem archaic so why do we not move them forward into the 21st century? Changes seem obvious so why not make them.

 

“I feel it was appropriate not to wait another year or another year after that to make sure the best people are elected. Not on the basis of how long they’ve been in post. It seems like a no brainer. We should be electing the best. The Bank of England elected Mark Carney – he didn’t need an eight-year apprenticeship.

 

“The chairman of Tesco doesn’t have to do an apprenticeship. And there’s no chance of someone such as a Craig Whyte getting in because he would never in a million years be elected by the members.

 

“Do we not trust ourselves to use rational selection criteria to select the best? If not we should pack up and go.”

 

Mulraney played down the effects of his resolution to control the game’s development budget.

 

He said: “It’s not a rule change. The strategy would still be set by the board. All it does is bring the structure of how we achieve the targets of improving the game closer to the clubs – who after all are producing our young players.

 

“Most boards don’t tell management how to manage they set strategy.”

 

'Who will protect future of country's young talent?' asks Scotland fans' chief

 

THE SPFL can’t be trusted to look after the future of the nation’s young players says Scotland fans chief Hamish Husband.

 

The West of Scotland Tartan Army spokesman shudders at the thought of the clubs muscling their way into the SFA.

 

Husband said: “Our youth teams – boys and girls – are qualifying for major championships and there seems to be a lot of progress.

 

“I know performance chief Mark Wotte has been criticised by some but I can’t see why. The results are speaking for themselves.

 

“The SFA is there to protect the game in this country and to nurture it. The clubs are only in it for themselves.

 

“When you see our youth teams doing well, it seems to be like the problems start when the clubs get hold of them.

 

“They actively stood in the way of youth development. They are the ones who brought in cheap foreign players over the years.

 

“The clubs only think in the short term. If you look at England, the clubs down there have a huge say.

 

“They basically ran over the top of the FA and look what it’s done for their national team.

 

“At a time when it looks like we are starting to have some positivity around the Scotland team again, I wouldn’t be comfortable with the clubs having control over the future of the game.

 

“There is a suspicion this is all down to money.”

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/football-news/sfa-agm-george-peat-criticises-3437469

[True_Ger_1872 2]

Resolution 4 is rather interesting. Is this not what was effectively allowed to happen when we were heading into the newco route; with the individual clubs being given the decision to make as opposed to the SPL board itself?

 

Also - am i correct in thinking this resolution could still prove to hinder us in our recovery if this is passed prior to us returning to the top flight?

[BrahimHemdani 1]

The independence of the SFA as the governing body is vital to football at all levels in this country, whatever you might think of their decisions from time to time.

 

This is a power struggle, Doncaster (having knocked out Longmuir) v Regan; SPL (having knocked out the SFL) v the SFA.

 

The EPL rule the roost in England; looks like Messrs Lawwell and Doncaster have been at their academy.

[RANGERRAB 3,254]

I think this is all to do with cash-strapped clubs plundering the SFA for cash under the pretence of youth development.

The SPFL has no sponsor and a derisory TV deal thanks to Liewell & Doncaster arranging it at the start of last season when SKY were getting jittery about no Rangers in the top flight

Where better to get cash than the SFA's cash reserves eh?

[ian1964 10,409]

Scottish FA agree to compromise over SPFL resolutions

 

The Scottish FA have partly agreed to resolutions proposed by the Scottish Professional Football League over the structure of the game.

 

The amount of Professional Game Board members on the SFA board can increase from one to two.

 

And prospective presidents/vice-presidents will only need to have served one year within a recognised football body, rather than four.

 

Resolutions over new members and budget and policy setting will be withdrawn.

 

In a joint statement, the boards of the SFA and SPFL said a new resolution will be submitted which "will deal with the appointment of new full members such that they will need to be licensed clubs".

 

“The agreements reached will give the professional game the increased influence it has been seeking”

 

Neil Doncaster SPFL chief executive

 

The PGB will have an involvement in the budget and policy setting processes but the SFA will retain "overall responsibility for the financial budget relating to performance and football development".

 

SFA chief executive Stewart Regan welcomed the outcome of Tuesday's joint board meeting, saying: "It is important that we continue to work together with the SPFL, as with all other football bodies, to ensure that we take the national game forward both at senior professional level and in grassroots."

 

And SPFL counterpart Neil Doncaster added: "The SPFL aims to work in partnership with the Scottish FA to ensure the senior professional game in Scotland is as vibrant as possible.

 

"The agreements reached at board level today demonstrate that relationship and will give the professional game the increased influence it has been seeking."

 

Alloa Athletic chairman Mike Mulraney had proposed the resolutions but played down suggestions that the SPFL's intention was to seize power.

 

And, on Monday, Mulraney said he expected some sort of compromise to be found.

 

"We don't think it is particularly revolutionary - it is just appropriate change," Mulraney had commented.

 

"We just want to be able to select the best people to be on the board and we want a little bit more representation on that board.

 

"Let's not close all the doors because people are frightened or are protecting their fiefdoms."

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/27119514