Cups and culpability

However, someone reminded him, the question was not about the Istanbul Champions League night, but the 2005 Carling Cup final, which Liverpool lost 3-2 in extra time to Chelsea, with Gerrard heading an own goal. His face darkened. He described it as a "nightmare" that left him feeling "suicidal".

Several conclusions come from that exchange ahead of Liverpool's clash today with Cardiff in this year's League Cup final. The first – and obvious – one is that Gerrard evidently doesn't think much of Carling Cup failures of years past. On the other hand, he's been asked about Istanbul zillions of times, so when he hears the words "2005" and "final" he clicks into autopilot.

The other, though, concerns his use of the word "suicidal". That's not a throwaway comment, you would assume, it's hyperbole. Watching him speak, you get the sense it really, really hurt. And you wonder what went through his mind. At the time, he was 25 and entering the prime of his career. He had already won silverware – an FA Cup, a Uefa Cup, two League Cups – though it was a turbulent time at Liverpool.

After seven seasons of Gerard Houllier, there was a new manager, Rafa Benitez, and the going was bumpy, with the club slipping out of the top four. Roman Abramovich, some 18 months after taking over at Chelsea, had him squarely in his sights and was making the kind of offer which was hard to refuse. Gerrard was going to have to make a decision, possibly the biggest of his career: leave the club he had signed for aged nine to join the Abramovich revolution at Stamford Bridge, and have a genuine shot at major silverware, or stay at Anfield, where his dream was increasingly looking to be of the dead-end variety?

Gerrard stayed. And we can speculate endlessly about how Istanbul influenced that choice. But there's something at once cruel and honest in his words. A reminder that, for all the talk of money and trophies, any footballer, anywhere, lives his profession in the most visceral way.

The pain of losing wasn't in any way mitigated by the fact that, professionally and financially, he pretty much had the world at his feet. It hurt, because that's what losing is supposed to do. It's at times like those when we are reminded of the humanity of our football stars.

Losing the League Cup may have been painful for Gerrard. But losing the League Cup would actually help English football. Its continuation is an ode to short-sighted money grabbing. Which, actually, is why it was created. By the early 1960s many clubs had floodlights. They figured a midweek competition played in the evenings would be a great way to put some bums on seats to help pay for their newly illuminated grounds. So the League Cup was created and, in the early years, many top clubs declined to participate as they saw it for what it was: a rather meaningless nuisance. Indeed, until 1984, the final wasn't even broadcast live.

Nowadays it has become a bizarre exercise over a single leg with understrength sides until the semi-finals when, suddenly, they switch to two legs and managers field reasonable teams.

There are basically two benefits to it. The first is that it's a "route into Europe" as the winner qualifies for the Europa League. Thing is, in six of the last eight seasons the League Cup winner would have qualified anyway via the league position. And the two which failed to do so made early exits the following years.

It also allows the winner to talk of silverware and Wembley finals. Had Arsenal beaten Birmingham last season we wouldn't have had endless reminders of how Arsene Wenger has not won a trophy since 2005. Should Liverpool win today, it will be a Kenny Dalglish lovefest. You'll hear 50,000 fans sing at the top of their lungs. But ask them if they'd swap their shiny new trophy for a top-four finish and you know what the answer would be.

Whatever happens with Rangers, you can only hope the Scottish Premier League learns a basic lesson. When a club goes into administration, or just hits the financial skids, everyone suffers. A rising tide really does lift all boats and it's high time our leagues fully understood this.

With greater oversight and control, Rangers would not be in this position. How to avoid this happening in the future? Easy. Introduce tougher licensing for clubs and greater transparency.

Had all of Rangers' books been fully public and consultable online, the odds are, warning bells would have rung a long time ago. It's called crowdsourcing, and it works. Here, one anonymous blogger was able to shine a light as they had access to certain documents and familiarity with regulations. Imagine everyone had the same access. How much sooner would the public – including, crucially, Rangers fans – have been aware of what was going on?

As for the licensing, the SPL are free to make whatever rules they like. The easiest thing to do is place limits on debt-to-turnover ratios or ban certain forms of financing, such as securitising future season ticket sales. If a club doesn't meet the requirements, you give them two options. Either the owner dips into his own pocket to make an equity injection, or you force them to sell players or not renew contracts until they meet the criteria. If they want to play in the SPL, that's what they have to do, plain and simple.

That's the route to stability, a stronger, tougher SPL. Rangers fans are suffering most, but everyone is hurt by this. If the SPL can't give themselves new regulations on auditing, oversight and enforcement, next time a club goes the way of Rangers feel free to consider them at the very least negligent and, at worst, accessories.