FOR such a supposedly commonsense addition to the Scottish football season, the play-offs don't half cause a lot of bother.

On the face of it, the addition of a series of money spinning matches at the business end of the campaign should be a win-win for everybody. This is new money for new matches, right? All broadcast to a rapt TV audience? So why does the Scottish game seem to be in danger of tearing itself apart over it again?

Rule C26 of the SPFL constitution is a seemingly innocuous little paragraph, but it is currently assuming the numerical notoriety of Clause 4 or Section 28. That is the passage which stipulates that 50% of the gate receipts from the six Premiership play-off matches to be played from May 9 to May 31 must be levied to the league and shared amongst all 42 of its member clubs. It is a proposal which all clubs signed up to when the league was formed in 2013 and one that all clubs involved in this year's play-offs have pledged to abide by, even though Hibernian, with the backing of Hearts and Motherwell, recently saw a motion to reduce that to 25% defeated only a week ago.

As it turns out, however, that was only the start of the matter. Rangers - plus Motherwell should they end up there - have pledged to allow their season ticket holders into play-off matches for free, a fact which will drastically reduce the amount of hard cash which makes it into this central pot to be shared around the remaining clubs. Hibs have yet to confirm whether they will follow suit again this year.

Football clubs, particularly in Scotland, aren't always marked by their altruism. So it is fair to surmise that all the actors in this particular scenario have their own reasons for doing so. Even if cynics suggest that what unites them in their common stance is the necessity to sell season tickets for next season.

For their part, Hibs could cite the example of last year when, with their team threatened by relegation and season tickets agreed before the league restructure, they argued their case was exceptional and were granted some leeway by the SPFL. The league's largesse has left them wide open, as all parties can now point to the precedent and demand the same kind of treatment.

Motherwell, potentially facing the same quandary as Hibs last year, simply speak of rewarding their fans should they end up in this position. While their hopes of altering their fate live on, they wearily note that going into the play-offs as the relegation-threatened team isn't much fun, perhaps exactly why the successful English system doesn't include any of such poor souls.

They feel their season ticket holders signed up for the story of their season and it is unfair to charge them extra to discover the ending. That moral argument is similar to the one which saw broadcasters given the rights to screen last season's play-off matches for free, although thankfully BT Sport have at least thrown a sum of around £100,000 into the pot this time around.

But more controversial than the rest, simply because of the sums at play, is Rangers' determination to do likewise. They too have a story to tell. Few season ticket holders have had to endure more. So why shouldn't they get up to three more free matches on their season books? The club is standing up for the working man who is being priced out of football. Who could argue with that?

Well, the rest of Scottish football, and the rest of the SPFL board, that's who. The subtext lurking beneath all this is the Scottish FA's pledge to bankroll parachute payments of £500,000 for the first year, plus an additional undertaking of £250,000 should any team relegated through the play-offs fail to return at the first time of asking. That two-year arrangement comes to an end this summer, and in all likelihood the SPFL will have to find that money themselves.

With Hibs, Rangers, and potentially Motherwell, involved, this year is deemed a bumper year, but as the SPFL is deemed a not-for-profit organisation, where all funds are distributed to members, there is no chance to build up a surplus for future lean years. Consequently, all extra cash is simply split between the clubs, albeit on a sliding scale set by league position, where 82% goes to the Premiership and the remaining 18% goes to the rest. You wouldn't have to be an arch conspiracy theorist to suggest that Rangers might not be overly enamoured about welcoming 150,000 of their fans through the doors in the space of three weeks, only to hand a huge chunk of the cash over to rivals such as Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee United.

Anyway, while the SPFL say they are currently reviewing its position on the subject, in secret the battle lines are being drawn. The rebel clubs stand by their guns, tacitly challenging the league to reprimand them for fighting the good fight. They insist that another league rule, which insists on the charging of comparable prices for home and away fans in all league matches for seats with a comparable view, provides only a flimsy basis for any sanctions taken to recoup lost cash.

The SPFL hierarchy are the bad guys again. The will of the 42 member clubs was made clear on this subject only a week ago, they say, so any team who breaks the rules must suffer the consequences.

This one has a distance to run, a struggle which may be every bit as exhausting as the play-offs themselves. Everybody knows the current format is imperfect, a messy compromise which never envisaged that three of Scotland's bigger clubs might find themselves in the second tier. But as the SFA ponders withdrawing funding, and we reach the end of the three-year lock-in period after the league restructure, it would be a shame indeed if the play-offs became so divisive that everybody decided they were all too much hassle again.