BEING Neil Doncaster. It says it all about the SPFL chief executive's status as Scottish football's omnipresent pantomime villain that even when he is presenting your team with a trophy, it does little to increase his popularity.

This, on the face of it, was the kind of uncomplicated moment he had been waiting fully two years for: an opportunity to declare the league finally had a new title sponsor. But then, on the very day gambling giants Ladbrokes were committing to ploughing an additional £4m into our national sport over the next two seasons, it was always a pretty safe bet that the man Scottish football loves to hate would have sundry other, less positive, items cluttering his in-tray. In the course of a wide ranging discussion with Herald Sport, the SPFL chief executive mounted a robust defence of his own performance in six years in the role, and touched on all manner of contemporary issues in the Scottish game. As good a place as any to start was why our clubs shouldn't feel bad about accepting money from the profits of gambling, a business which creates as many winners and losers as football.

Herald Sport: Congratulations on the Ladbrokes sponsorship. It has been quite a wait.

Neil Doncaster: It is great news. The clubs were very clear in their stance that they wanted the right sort of partner and the right sort of deal. They have got that in Ladbrokes, who are a UK, blue chip, FTSE-listed company.

HS: So criticism of the two-year wait for a title sponsor is unfair then?

ND: There have been a number of deals and offers which have been turned down by the board and the member clubs over the previous two or three years. It has not been the easiest time to be selling a high-value sponsorship such as this because obviously we have had a number of member clubs in extreme and unprecedented financial difficulties, but nonetheless over a period of time the clubs were clear that they wanted a certain value of deal and a certain financial partner and they have got that. I think the clubs' stance not to take those early deals has been vindicated.

HS: In the last few years, players such as Ian Black and Steve Simonsen have been caught up in the SFA's strict regulations against betting, and match-fixing is accepted as a problem in the wider sport. Do you have any disquiet at all about accepting gambling sponsorship or can beggars simply not be choosers?

ND: I think most sensible commentators see the difference between players who can influence the outcome of a game, and referees and ourselves, who aren't allowed to bet on games in Scotland and members of the public and supporters for who a bet involving the game is part of how they enjoy the game.

HS: Do you like to bet yourself?

ND: I used to enjoy a bet on the football prior to getting involved in the game up here. But the rules are slightly different in England. You were allowed to bet on games involving other teams. I think responsible gambling is absolutely at the heart of what Ladbrokes are all about.

HS: Onto other matters. After your intervention to prevent them letting season ticket holders in for free, Rangers have said they will charge all supporters just £5 for admittance for play-off games. Is this not flouting the spirit, if not the letter, of the SPFL rules regarding the play-off levy?

ND: It is the clubs who set the rules. It is the league's board's role is to enforce those rules and ensure they are properly regarded and met by the clubs. If clubs are not breaking the rules, that's fine. If they [Rangers] are charging £5 to everyone then they are abiding by the rules. One of the changes which was proposed in April this year was minimum pricing in play-off games and that was rejected.

HS: Were you at fault for the way the Hearts v Rangers last day fixture was moved to the Sunday, whilst Hibs' match at Falkirk stayed on the Saturday?

ND: That is the right which TV has bought. But do you think that Iain Blair, with 17 years of fixturing experience, would have missed that point? What he did do was move the Hearts-Rangers game at the request of TV, then consult with other clubs about moving their games, whilst recognising that certainly a number of games were going to have to move. It was not a contingency - clearly the Hibs game was going to have to move, to ensure that the games were going to kick off at the same time. But Iain chose to consult with clubs before making that decision. Perhaps one of the lessons was, don't consult with clubs about moving of fixtures. Just move them en masse. There was a perception that sporting integrity was somehow overlooked, but the reality couldn't have been further from that truth. But we allowed that perception by consulting with clubs rather than simply rescheduling all the games immediately. We would then have probably been accused of being heavy handed and causing massive disruption.

HS: Ann Budge and Leeann Dempster were both heavily critical of you around that time. How did you react? Do you ever feel like walking away?

ND: If you don't like criticism then you are in the wrong role. That is the reality of the job I took, the reality of the job I have today. Nothing has changed and anyone who comes into this role thinking it is going to be different is going to get a very rude awakening. I don't personally feel the need to be praised the whole time and I don't take the criticism personally. As long as I do a good job for the clubs - and I believe that I and the team are - then that is all that you can do.

HS: Is it fair to say, though, that tensions seem quite high between rival camps over the levy row, with the likes of Hearts, Hibs and maybe Rangers lining up on one side, with Celtic, Aberdeen and Dundee United on the other?

ND: You will get moments of tension from time to time. That is natural. The issue is - we are a 42-club collective, is there a sufficient consensus to change? If there is, we end up with a new set of rules, whether it is around league cup, number of games, whatever. If not and we end up with the same rule book, either way the board's role is to apply the rules on behalf of all 42 member clubs.

HS: Do you expect the likes of Ann Budge or Leeann Dempster to get a seat on the board this summer?

ND: There is a July AGM, one of four general meetings per year. This is the point where the clubs appoint their divisional representatives for the year - three from the Premiership, two from the Championship and one from League One and League Two. Each league elects its own directors, so it is very open, democratic and transparent. Clubs are nominating people to get involved and then it is voted at the AGM.

HS: What about the 11th hour decision as to whether or not to extend the season? Surely you were fortunate Hibs were beaten in the Scottish Cup semi-final

ND: Here is the news. We will be in the same position next year. Next year, when the Scottish Cup final and the play-off final are scheduled for the same weekend, there could be a conflict. You would rather have conflicts that you then manage, rather than go down the route of no possible conflict, and have a lot more games, midweek in mid January. Which no-one wants.

HS: What do you make of the conspiracy theories that league restructuring will take place to parachute Rangers back into the top-flight if they fail in the play-offs.

ND: What do you think? I can't foresee that happening.

HS: There has been talk of changes to the league cup, incorporating a July start to the season. Do you sense a mood for change?

ND: There is certainly a debate around the best structure for the league cup and the league. We can help, guide and talk about options but fundamentally it is the clubs that decide. When they want to play their games, what format they want to play them in, how many games they want to play, what the broadcast arrangements are, these are decisions the clubs have to reach. We are in a lockdown period of three years so nothing realistically can happen in terms of league structure for three years. That period ends next summer.

HS: What about the broadcast deal? Is it true that Sky Sports and BT Sport can renew for a broadly comparable sum this Spring and is there any movement?

ND: "I can't go into detail but broadcast arrangements remain a live discussion. What we need to try to do is turn TV and TV coverage into games from something which is currently perceived as a negative for some into a positive, a pro-active part of the professional game. Some countries have a facility payment, where those clubs which appear on TV the most get more money. We don't do that, we have a ladder mechanism, regardless of how many times you are on TV.

HS: What is next on the agenda?

ND: It never stops. You know we will continue to have discussions on the League Cup, you know we will continue to have discussions on the TV deal.

HS: And you're still enjoying the job as much as when you started.

ND: Yes. Absolutely.