GLF 43: TV Cash and the Old Infirm

Last updated : 16 August 2017 By GLF

Gavin McCafferty looks at TV finances.

C:WindowsTempphp5D00.tmp


TV Cash and the Old Infirm

So, David Murray has finally admitted defeat in the Old Firm's great campaign to join the English Premiership. It's probably the most welcome statement to come from Ibrox for……..no hang on, how can I forget the one that started off 'Gentlemen of the press, let me introduce you to the new manager of Glasgow Rangers Football Club' just a couple of months ago. But hopefully Murray's confession that he thought the move was highly unlikely will spell the end of the longest-running non-story in the history of journalism.

Can you imagine the Portuguese media running stories every day on the inevitability of Porto and Benfica joining the Primera Liga? Why, it's obvious, is it not? Surely a football nation's duty is to give its biggest two teams every possible chance of earning as much money as possible? That's the line we've been getting fed by a significant proportion of the media as they continue to pander to the Old Firm hoards.

And now there appears to be a genuine possibility that Sky are going to withdraw their TV deal - and much of the dialogue seems to be blaming the other eight SPL sides for not providing strong enough competition. Yet, in all the discussions over TV money, Celtic and Rangers are demanding the lion's share of the pot. Okay, they are televised far more than any of the other sides, but how do they expect to improve the level of competition when they seriously think they should be getting more than 80% of a TV deal - and that's them being generous?

What would the Old Infirm do with more money anyway? Well, from their recent signings and attempted buys, Martin O'Neill would buy some second-rate Premiership players and Big Eck would trawl Scandinavia for the new Shaun McSkimming. Perhaps if the cash was spread around more, there could be far more money to spend on youth development in Scotland. That is where a country's football future is derived. Far too much of the money that comes into Scottish football from Sky, or wherever else, leaves so soon afterwards. I'm sure Rangers have done more for the welfare of elderly Dutch footballers than the PFA in Holland could ever dream of. Yes, football is more and more an international game, and it has been profoundly affected by the relaxation of barriers in the international movement of labour - but Scottish football has to think of its future.

When the SPL chairmen sit round the table to discuss how to best capitalise on the broadcasting potential of their 'product', perhaps they should take a few minutes to discuss where they see the future of their product going in the long-term. A future that lasts longer than the ink drying on any TV contract. Clubs need the money to be able to develop the likes of Lasley and McFadden in greater numbers. And the Old Firm need to take the lead on the matter.

We are a small country, and you don't really see any big clubs in similar-sized nations being able to splash out £12m on inconsistent Chelsea reserves. Has it escaped the Old Firm's attention that Sparta Prague and Dynamo Kiev have done so well in Europe with young sides they have spent years developing?

The chairmen of the SPL clubs need to look at what has been happening in countries like Sweden, Denmark and Holland over the last 25 years. There seems to be an accepted train of thought that footballing ability is some mystical power that comes in waves - there just isn't the talent in Scotland these days - it's a lean spell. The fact is, the system that is meant to spot and develop talent is haphazard and the facilities second-rate compared to comparable countries.

It appears that John Boyle, in his first three years of being involved in the game, realised that the way football is invested in Scottish football these days is akin to throwing money down a drain. You have to hope that a man with his business sense (and his wad of cash) stays at Fir Park to oversee investment in the grass roots of the game in Lanarkshire. Seeing some of our younger stars come onto a game has given me far greater pleasure than seeing Ged Brannan produce the occasional game he was capable of playing more often. For a while, perhaps forever, we'll lose such players to clubs with more money, be they in the English Second Division or wherever. But what is the point in clubs paying thousands upon thousands per week on players who may not even make an impact on the Scottish game?

It's a sad indictment that Rangers have only just completed their training complex, and established a recognisable 'academy'. Maybe their total failures in Europe over the years could have convinced them that they had to put more money into developing Scottish talent? But Rangers' poor European performances don't bother me. I'm sure our friend Alex will take care of them no matter what the investment policy at Ibrox. What matters is that Celtic and Rangers - now they have apparently accepted that their futures are based within the structure of the Scottish game - realise that such a future depends on them allowing the rest of the clubs a greater share of TV cash.

The rest of Scotland's clubs need to be able to safeguard their own futures - there are far too many short-term solutions and chopping and changing midway through seasons. If Scottish football wants to attract TV investment, it has to have teams capable of producing good football, teams built up through the years, teams people can identify with, like the New Firm of the 80s and even the Motherwell side of 1993-94.

The clubs have to start ensuring that whatever investment comes into the game,is subsequently invested in the game - not random Dutch players. I mean are we saying that, with a bit of investment, we couldn't produce players better than Bert Konterman? Let's have a bit of foresight,and a bit more belief. And some of your TV cash, Mr Murray.

Gavin McCafferty

 Visit the GLF archive.  Hundreds of articles.