The other day, FIFA suddenly decided it would be a good idea to play the 2022 World Cup in the winter. No matter that, during the whole voting process, the Qatar bid was all about playing in state-of-the-art stadiums with special cooling systems to keep the players and fans cool. There was no mention, over the three years that the bid was advertised, that a Qatari World Cup would be used to try and force the rest of the footballing world to stop what it was doing, release all its players, and work out some way of sorting out their leagues to deal with it.
Of course there wasn't a mention - that sort of condition would have prevented anyone from touching the bid with a barge pole. So the World Cup we get will not be the World Cup we were told we would get. Sounds like a liberal democrat campaign promise. The cynic in me believes that Sepp Blatter knew a December World Cup would be inevitable long ago, but kept it quiet - it's amazing how gazillions of petro-dollars can keep one's mouth firmly shut.
The same week, Henry McLeish's long-awaited report into Scottish football was released. I actually trawled through the whole thing (two hours of my life I will never have back) and here are a few points worth noting.
1) It appears to have been written by an eight year old. Literally. Typos and grammatical/spelling errors everywhere. At least most 21st century eight year olds know Microsoft Word has a spellcheck function. The pick of the bunch: "The SFA's turnover in 2009 was £25". I know there's a credit crunch but, well, I paid more than that for my cup final ticket.
2) McLeish does not, technically, recommend a 10 team SPL - he mentions it as one of the best options for change, along with a 14 team league. There is certainly no mention of a two-tier SPL...despite about a hundred BBC articles since the report was published saying that his report endorses this.
3) There is, tucked away in the report, a quiet mention that a 14 team SPL would be "more in tune with what fans and spectators are asking for". I don't see the SPL themselves paying even lip service to this. You would think that customer opinion might we worth more than a warm bucket of piss (a prize goes to whoever knows where that reference comes from).
4) What is there to be gained from a 10 team SPL? It's quite simple; the money is only divided ten ways. As it is, more than a third of the cash goes to the top two teams - with a massive drop off to third place. We've seen, in recent years, Aberdeen and Hearts both finish as low as 9th, and Dundee Utd finish lower. Therefore, everyone except the Gruesome Twosome will have a nervous thought or two about relegation. Methinks this does not mean exciting football - a nil-nil at home will always seem like an ok result. But the Old Firm get more dosh, so what do they care? The bottom line is this - a 10 team SPL is about as competitive as a 100m dash between Usain Bolt and a paraplegic whose wheelchair has been clamped.
5) McLeish claims a 14 team league means "the quality of the SPL would also be a major consideration" - i.e. we would be letting two rubbish teams in. Since the last decade has only seen the damned Gretna relegated the year after promotion, and with St. J nearly making top six last year and Inverness flying this time around, this argument, frankly, is complete hokum.
6) So what is this report actually useful for? Real toilet paper would be more comfortable, and I can't think of any other reasons.
The bottom line? Never again should anyone believe for a second that anyone at the top of football is interested in the good of the game, for all they care about is self-preservation and the lining of their own pockets. The only thing that makes them less crooked than some of those who call themselves MPs is that no-one's charged the cleaning of their moat to FIFA or the SPL yet.
But it's only a matter of time.
L.
No comments:
Post a Comment