THE revolution has been postponed.

There is no point, after all, in going into a battle that one is destined to lose. The Gang of Ten yesterday delayed any move on the voting structure of the SPL until later this month. The Rangers situation was cited as the reason for this pause in the march of perceived progress.

The problem for the reformers, of course, is how to change an 11-1 voting system when two of the clubs, that is Rangers and Celtic, are committed to the status quo.

The only way change could be effected is if Rangers are disenfranchised through liquidation or persuaded that it would be in their best interests to agree to a new structure in return for continued participation in the SPL.

However, the administrators at Rangers – and presumably any potential owner of the Ibrox club – are keen to retain the current process, whereby the Old Firm can effectively veto plans to change the way the league is run.

There is one good reason for this: money. There is one driving force behind the reform: money.

There has been much unseemly scrambling up the moral high ground on the SPL voting. There have been clarion calls that a change to a 9-3 system would hail a brave new world of transparent democracy. There has been much earnest talk of the league subsequently becoming more competitive. There has been utopian visions of a rising in standards with presumably legions of new fans joining this extended party and gambolling through the meadow to a wonderful future of jam for all on freshly baked scones.

But how about this for a perhaps more realistic scenario? The Gang of Ten goes ahead with its bid on voting reform with Rangers either stripped of a vote or coerced into joining the move. Two ways lie ahead.

First, the voting changes go though and the money is more equally distributed. Fans of Rangers and Celtic – the most substantial stakeholding faction in paying customers in Scottish football – decide this equality is all very well but it does not cut the mustard when they cannot buy a decent striker for Europe and their clubs go out to Football Club Mediocre of Bosnia Herzegovinia in the first qualifying round of the Champions League, held on the same day as the Wimbledon men's final. They walk, and not in the direction of any SPL ground.

Second, how about this? Rangers, faced with major concessions to the Gang of Ten, simply declare that the SPL game is up and they will head to the lower reaches of the SFL.

This, incidentally, is the preferred option of two sections of the Rangers support, namely those irate at the SPL machinations and those who believe that such punishment would be appropriate, even fair.

This eventuality would create a situation that bristles with intrigue. It would form the basis of a Mexican stand-off. Would the Gang of Ten hold to their firm principles over the necessity of voting change in the face of Rangers taking their team and their support into another league? Would they, in effect, vote to have a considerably reduced pot of cash in the short to medium term?

As votes are being postponed, as preferred bidders for Rangers weigh up the implications, as Scottish football fans listen with strained patience to talk of 11-1, 9-3 and a top league of 10, 12 or even 16, there is one bottom line. The ball is on the slates and the game is going down the stank.

The £80m Sky deal is still not signed and predicated on four Old Firm games. This would be easier to achieve if Celtic and Rangers are in the same league. This is also a league that so far cannot find a sponsor.

The introduction of an under-20 league – the principal development of yesterday's meeting – is both welcome and promising. One shudders, though, at the prospect facing its young players as they graduate towards an SPL that trembles with tension, is slowly becoming mired in tedious, inconclusive debate and faces a deeply uncertain financial future.