BILLY BREMNER MEMORIAL JOIN OUR CAMPAIGN
Date: 6th April 2025
Well, that was exciting. The Herald broke the story that league reconstruction was back on the agenda, all the rest of the media piled in (it keeps the poor dears occupied, creating drama where none exists) and within a few days the Record was reporting, “The shortest-lived Scottish football reconstruction plan in living memory was only on the table for a couple of days before it became crystal clear it simply wasn’t going to wash.”
Of course it wasn’t. As the Record also pointed out, the voting structure of the Premiership means that turkeys don’t vote for Christmas. However, to keep the pot boiling, their journalist also interviewed a number of prominent people to get their views. Five were managers; only one (Adam Webb of St Johnstone) was a club owner. Mr Webb is the only one of those six who gets a vote. His desire, perhaps understandable given Saints’ current plight, is for a larger league. In this, he is at one with, I suspect, a lot of fans (and not just Saints’ fans like me).
Meanwhile, on the BBC, Brian McLauchlan suggested that it was “unlikely the SPFL will ask fans,” but if they do, then “whether they listen to them or not is another issue.”
The SFSA, as the largest fans’ organisation in the country, is very much of the view that the SPFL should – and we think will – ask the fans, as and when it’s appropriate to do so. Given that the story has now been dampened down as the Record and others realised that there are too many obstacles in the way just now, it is perhaps worth pointing out that we were one of the very few organisations that made the point in its social media posts after the story broke that it was not going to happen. Meanwhile, our CEO’s subsequent blog succinctly pointed out the central problem, viz, “the whole issue is so damned complicated that it would take the judgement of an army of Solomons to come up with a scheme that pleased everyone AND made as much money as is currently being brought into the game in Scotland.”
The arguments are well rehearsed. The most notable, and definitely the strongest, is that bigger leagues give clubs the opportunity to bring through talented youngsters; something they are loathe to do just now because the penalties for failure are such that coaches will not take the risk. The recent, 114 page, SFA report into youth football seems to have been largely forgotten by the media, but it’s well worth reading as it does make a lot of valid arguments about the importance of youth development and also the existential issue about club finances (of which more below).
One argument that we hear from the media on a regular basis is that bigger leagues would result in more meaningless games. This can be dismissed on the grounds that the people who are most exercised about ‘meaningless games’ are those in the media. They love the post-split fight for second/third/European places and the battle to avoid the drop. Of course they do: it’s how they maintain their place in the football industry, by creating crises out of drama. Bear in mind that every team stands to make more money by moving up one or more rungs in the final table. That alone – while it’s not exactly televisual or exciting to read about on the back page of The Scotsman – means games are certainly not ‘meaningless.’ Moreover, getting to watch talented youngsters develop their skills is not, by any stretch of the imagination, ‘meaningless.’ Ignore the media and concentrate on improving Scottish football would be my advice.
Also, let’s not forget that this argument is largely about the Premiership and who has access to its riches. The problem is there are nearly as many ideas about how to structure the leagues as there are senior teams in Scotland, but the reality is that there are two central reasons why it is so difficult to devise a plan that will get voted through.
The first of these reasons is money. The SPFL announced last year that it had secured a record-breaking deal with bookmakers Wm Hill. Latest figures also show that turnover is at record levels. That record turnover is largely down to the main sponsor’s money and the league’s Sky Sports TV deal.
Two things come from these deals. Firstly, the Wm Hill sponsorship is for five years. I don’t know for certain, but I’m pretty sure that it was based on the current structure, meaning that any change is many years away. The Sky deal lasts until 2029. Last week’s media frenzy about league reconstruction should have noted these two deals and their timescales, adding that as a consequence nothing much could happen unless both Wm Hill and Sky were happy with any new structure.
Secondly, any league reconstruction has to be based on the fact that the TV companies will demand a minimum of four Old Firm matches per season. That’s where their biggest audiences are and, whether we like it or not, the reason they give so much money to Scottish football. Consequently, whether we like it or not (and personally I don’t), Rangers and Celtic are, from the point of view of the broadcast media, more important to Scottish football than the other clubs, and in the unlikely event they manage to leave the national league, sponsorship and revenue money would collapse. The top league might then be more competitive, but the standard would be massively reduced due to the lack of money.
None of this is to say that it’s not beyond the wit of mankind to come up with a structure for the Scottish men’s professional leagues that allows more clubs to compete at the top level. There are enough clubs outside the Premiership of the necessary size and status who have the ambition, if not currently the money, to become part of an enlarged – and entertaining – top Division. Moreover, the argument that it is only by increasing the size of the league that managers will be confident enough to introduce talented youngsters is one that, I believe, most fans agree with and would like to see succeed. And it’s those words, “most fans” that matter here. The SFSA is ready and willing to work with the SPFL to consult with the fans. Our voices must not only be heard, but also acted upon, for without fans, football is simply 22 men kicking a ball around a field. Fans provide not just atmosphere, but probably well over half of clubs’ income, more than the normal figure of 50% cited (from gate receipts) because if you look at any club’s income, huge chunks also come from ground and programme advertising, match day sponsorship, hospitality, etc, almost all of which are paid for by wealthy supporters who own local companies and want to support their team. We – the fans, wealthy or otherwise – are the mainstay of Scottish football and that’s why we hope the SPFL will work with us and other fans’ organisations over the next few years to try to solve this most intractable, but vital, issue of Scottish league reconstruction.
Alastair Blair, Director of Operations, SFSA
Posted in: Latest News
Tags: League Reconstruction