The Richt Question

Last updated : 04 May 2012 By RicoS321

The SPL needs Rangers, or so we are told.

The revenue they take into the Scottish game is huge (as a percentage), but then so is the revenue they extract. The support they bring to the game is huge, but then so is the local interest they steal.

The SPL chairmen have been, for the majority, silent on the issue. Afraid, perhaps, to tell their fans the truth – that the club they recognise, with the players they adore (Josh, Chris, Jamie – you know who you are) can’t fund itself.

Hud on though, I’ve done some fag packet calculations, and it turns out we don’t need Rangers after all as our crowds will grow and our TV deal is irrelevant.

The arguments will go back and forth like Chic Young’s wrist aside his “me and Walter” picture. In reality nobody knows and, if the Glasgow press have their way, no one  ever will.

However, it strikes me that we’re not asking the right question. The question isn’t “does the SPL need Rangers?”, it is “why does the SPL need Rangers?”. The answer shouldn’t take the form: “because of the money, the Sky, the peepil byreway”. The question is why we have allowed our league, if it is the case, to become so reliant on two clubs?

The public may never know whether or not the SPL can survive without Rangers. It may not be worth the risk. It does deserve to know what the SPL intends to do to ensure that the next Rangers liquidation, or simply a jaunt in an Atlantic league, doesn’t arrive at the same farce.

Reading back through my last paragraph, the Dandy in me screams abuse at this hun-loving criminal. How dare he suggest that the league could not survive without Rangers? He’s one of them. Whoever has got to Richard Gordon has got to him too.

Despite my Goramic personality, I stand by my/his statement. I’m as partisan as the next Don – just ask the Arab I keep tied up in my basement (he’s dead like, but the ropes keep him nice and compact; room for the hoover and all that) – but what if Jim Traynor is correct (the sickness flows to my nostrils. I catch it just in time)? The SPL does need Rangers? Do we want to bankrupt the league by calling the bluff of the bankrupted bankruptor by sending them to the third division, or do we accept what our chairmen’s silence suggests – that we simply can’t afford to consign “Them” to the hunbin?

Let’s go back to the previous question then: “why does the SPL need Rangers?”. Back in the SPL beginning, despite a fine batch of resignations, the clubs signed up to this fate. They allowed Rangers (and Celtic, of course) to become their protector. They sold out to the bigoted overlord from Glasgow. They created a dependency.

So, in reality, we’re looking in the wrong place. Instead of putting our energies into banishing der hun, we need to concentrate on pushing for a sustainable league – what we have just now is the antithesis of this; only a Lawwell-English championship-threat from the brink. Whilst I believe this is possible without involving Rangers (and indeed, in my not-in-possession-of-enough-facts opinion, would be easier to implement), it may be that we need the Rangers’ income to see through the changes; to bring us to a sustainable footing.

The calls for Rangers to be kept in the SPL have drowned sensible thought in a golden shower of Hugh Keevins’ pish. Get them back in for the sake of the game! Maintain the quo! It really isn’t that simple.

If Scottish fitba does really need Rangers then we have a huge problem. The unsustainable nature of that very sentence should send Noah out to build a fitba-Ark with one of every team aboard ready to build a new league when the floods of Glasgow-bile are swept away into the Atlantic. If the league can’t survive without Rangers at present, then it needs to find the top of the mountain as quickly as possible.

A Rangers 'newco' means a period of no Rangers. This is the time to act. With a 10-1 majority (a non-existent newco can have no vote), it is possible to ring the changes in the Scottish game. Immediately, a change to the vote and an even split of revenues (not based on league position – this perpetuates the imbalance).

Follow it up with a move to a larger league (preferably 16 teams) within 2-3 years – this removes the reliance of four Glasgow-two visits, which has dogged our game and exacerbated our dependency.

In the same period, negotiate a fair TV deal with a broadcaster based on the expanded league; fair, meaning even coverage of all teams and consistent kick-off times. This removes the reliance on two teams securing our TV deal, as well as reliance on the deal itself, switches focus back to fans through the gate and allows other teams to benefit from better sponsorship from having a fairer exposure.  There are many other changes that can be made (share of youth development costs, salary caps etc), but only one opportunity to do it.

I firmly believe that the SPL can flourish without Rangers, but can so many people be wrong? While self-interest reigns in the media, our own chairmen appear too quiet to suggest they have a Plan B. If there is a dependency on Rangers (or Celtic) then the clubs outwith have to act together to ensure this dependency is removed as soon as possible - with Rangers there or without.

Many have questioned the sporting integrity of allowing Rangers back in to our league, but the SPL has been devoid of integrity since its inception.

I want things to happen quickly, I’m a fan, I’m impatient. I want Craig Brown out and the new up-and-coming Ferguson in. I want us to sign the next Jess to play alongside Mackie, eh I mean Vernon and bang in twenty. I want The Rangers out (has anyone else noticed the resurrection of the “The” in Rangers over the past couple of months?).

Sometimes, though, you can’t always get what you want (I’d like to thank my friend Mick for that last phrase). Happiness to me would be the Dons at the top of a competitive and equal league, anything bad that happens to Rangers is just a by-product, it’ll take care of itself (or at least HMRC will).

If we have to let them back in, then so be it, but it can’t be at the cost of fairness. Unless this is a catalyst to completely overhaul our league and completely remove any dependency on Celtic and Rangers then I and, I imagine, many others won’t be back.

For now, much as it pains me, I’m taking a step back from the “throw them oot oor league” and concentrating on what’s best for Scottish fitba. While the two aren’t mutually exclusive, I know I’ve been too concerned with what is worse for them over what is best for us.

I’ll see you on Hun Liquidation 1….

RicoS321