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
Post a Comment