Skip to main content

Scottish clubs could cross the border through the back door

When I was at Strathclyde University taking a MSc in 1968/9 we were discussing the rise of Scottish Nationalism and the sources of Scottish identity.   The tutor was expecting us to come up with the conventional answers: education system; legal system; Church of Scotland.   I knew that the Celtic Supporters Club was the largest student organisation at Strathclyde (reflecting the then composition of the student body).  I suggested that the national team -  together with the separate national competition - reinforced a distinct identity in a nation that was fitba’ crazy.

The tutor, who was from Missouri, asked what hypothesis I would advance to test the relevant importance of football compared with other sources of identity, a methodologically impossible task.  However, I did know that his American colleagues were sneaking into Old Firm matches when they could.   They simply had nothing like it back home.   (English expats tended to go to Partick Thistle).

There is a price to be paid for maintaining that distinct identity at national and club level, but I think that most Scots (and not just Nationalists) would agree that it was a price well worth paying.  Football, even today, is not just about money: it is also about emotion and commitment.

Could the Premier League benefit from having Celtic and Rangers involved? Would it allow those two institutions to finally realise their global potential? Might it also transform the domestic scene in Scotland by making Aberdeen, Hearts, Hibernian and Dundee United realistic — in fact, inevitable — title challengers and regular trophy winners?

All those questions can be answered in the affirmative. But none of those is the question that matters. The central one is what has changed since the one and only time the issue was seriously considered by England’s major clubs, and emphatically rejected? The answer is nothing.

The single, insurmountable hurdle is that when the Premier League is such a fabulously lucrative and rewarding division to be a part of, why would any owner vote for a change that would allow in two potentially powerful new rivals who might regularly finish respectably and so drive their own club closer to relegation?

Why would, say, Wolverhampton Wanderers or Everton vote to include clubs that could displace them and increase their jeopardy? Further up, why would Newcastle United or Aston Villa vote to allow new rivals who might, in time, make it harder for them to access the Champions League places? Turkeys don’t vote for Christmas.

The notion of any Scottish side willingly leaving to compete in English football was inconceivable — insulting, even — until the landscape began to change in the 1990s. As English football was revolutionised by grander and grander broadcasting deals and the Scottish scene — like many others — was left behind and impoverished, a feeling grew that Celtic and Rangers were being entombed in a domestic environment that had become far too small for them.

Vast season-ticket sales and commercial income at both clubs, and then increasingly lucrative access to the Champions League group stages, gave them a joint stranglehold on the domestic scene. Celtic are on course to be Scottish champions again and that will be the 40th title in a row that has stayed in Glasgow since Aberdeen won it under one Alex Ferguson in 1985.

When the Nationwide Football League’s broadcast partner, ITV Digital, collapsed in 2002 some panicking member clubs came up with the idea of inviting the Glasgow pair into England’s second tier. Not enough of them wanted that, though, and the national and international governing bodies were opposed. Still, the hare was running. The issue resurfaced again and again because it was a tantalising story that made enticing headlines and good clickbait.

Now, the tone in Glasgow is different. No one talks of inevitable moves down south any more. Peter Lawwell, Celtic’s chairman, has influence as a vice-chairman of the European Club Association, and within Celtic Park the emphasis has changed to the evolution of the Uefa tournaments and the guarantee of more annual games in Europe.

Might the women’s game be different? Glasgow City have been an admirable and dominant women’s team in Scotland but superior resources and their potential fan bases do point to Celtic and Rangers eventually taking over. They could outgrow rivals far, far faster than their men’s teams did and facing the likes of Chelsea and Real Madrid in the Women’s Champions League gave Celtic recent exposure to the elite. This is a sensitive, political issue but the women’s professional scene is still in its relative infancy and there may still be time for cross-border moves.

The Times has revealed that Celtic and Rangers have been engaged in secret talks to play in the Women’s Super League.   Watch this space.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Threat of financial calamity removed from Baggies

West Bromwich Albion had effectively been in decline ever since the club was sold to a Chinese consortium in August 2016, paying a figure north of £200m to buy former owner Jeremy Peace’s stake. Controlling shareholder Guochuan Lai’s ownership was fairly disastrous for the club, but his unloved tenure finally came to an end after Bilkul Football WBA, a company ultimately owned by Florida-based entrepreneur Shilen Patel and his father Dr Kiran Patel, acquired an 87.8% shareholding in West Bromwich Albion Group Limited, the parent company of West Bromwich Albion Football Club. This change in ownership was urgently required, due to the numerous financial problems facing West Brom, including growing high-interest debt and serious cash flow concerns, following years of no investment from the former owner. Indeed, West Brom’s auditors had already rung the alarm bell in the 2021/22 accounts when they cast doubt on the club’s ability to continue as a going concern without making player s...

Spurs to sell minority stake

Tottenham Hotspur is in talks to sell a minority stake in a deal that could value it at up to £3.75 billion and pave the way for Joe Lewis and his family to sever ties with the Premier League football club. Tottenham chairman Daniel Levy is seeking an investment that values the club at between £3.5 billion and £3.75 billion, including debt. While the terms of any deal have not been finalised, City sources expect Spurs to sell about 10 per cent. The club is being advised by bankers from Rothschild on the sale. Tottenham wants to raise fresh capital for new player signings and to help fund the development of an academy for its women’s team, as well as a 30-storey hotel next to its north London stadium. The financier Amanda Staveley, who brokered the deal for Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund to take over Newcastle United, is understood to be among the parties to have expressed an interest in Tottenham. Staveley’s fund, PCP Capital Partners, has raised about £500 million to ...

Millwall punch above their weight

Millwall’s season was overshadowed by the tragic death of owner John Berylson following a car accident. The American had been an exemplary owner, beloved by the fans for his leadership, passion and generosity. Millwall’s finances had been pretty good during his tenure, which we shall explore by looking at the most recent accounts from the 2022/23 season, when the club narrowly missed out on a place in the play-offs after finishing 8th. Millwall’s pre-tax loss slightly reduced from £12.6m to £12.2m, as revenue rose £0.8m (4%) from £18.6m to a club record £19.4m and player sales improved from a £0.1m loss to £2.5m profit. However, other operating income dropped from by £1.1m from £1.3m to £0.2m, while operating expenses increased £1.7m (5%) from £31.6m to £33.3m. The main driver of the revenue increase was broadcasting, which rose £1.1m (12%) from £9.1m to £10.2m, though match day was also up £0.4m (7%) from £5.8m to £6.2m. In contrast, commercial fell £0.7m (19%) from £3.7m to £3....