I FEEL sorry for David Longmuir.
He is someone who genuinely is working for the good of the game. But he has been left in limbo by the rebel First Division clubs going behind his back and writing to the SPL.
I hope they know what they are doing. I hope their legal advice is watertight and I hope they know for sure everything is going to go swimmingly for them as they try to cosy up to the SPL.
I can understand why they want to break away. They want to get their clubs healthy again, and bridge the gap so they can handle it better if they get promoted into the SPL.
But the proposal would need an 11-1 majority at the SPL again and I have a picture in my head where they resign from the league only for Stewart Gilmour and Roy MacGregor to knock it back again.
The rebel chairmen have obviously spoken to someone within the SPL, and think they have the support of the 10 clubs who backed the original 12-12-18 plan, but this could become embarrassing again.
They are trying to pressure chairmen into voting their way, but I doubt that will work. They have legal advice that they don't need to give two years' notice of resignation, and they clearly think they have a case. They are confident it can be started by the start of next season.
But even if they are proved correct, are the SPL clubs going to accept them on the terms they want? I am not so sure it is going to go as smoothly for the rebel 10 as Hamilton chairman Les Gray thinks.
Of course I have sympathy for the First Division chairmen in that they are trying to sustain full-time football on sums like £50,000-a-year prize money, which could go up to £300,000 if the all-through distribution model was back on the table.
They are panicking and willing to try anything to get the right financial deal. But their plans will mean the big get bigger and the weak get weaker.
These clubs should think about the chairmen they are leaving behind. If the SPL clubs had voted through the 12-12-18 reconstruction plans the SFL would eventually have gone with it.
So these First Division chairmen are effectively going to dump the ones who might eventually have voted it through and go cap in hand to the ones who dumped it in the first place.
As for whether Rangers would be invited to join this SPL2 with a 12-team format, the rebels are leaving their options open. It is funny that the SPL should have knocked the Ibrox club back last summer, but there remains the chance that they could be fast-tracked back in.
Everybody knows what they would bring – more finance and media interest. But it would be a hugely controversial move, not only with fans of other clubs but even with Rangers fans. Rangers have been totally against the SPL since last summer, but suddenly someone comes up with a carrot which might make sense for them and the SPL clubs. It is definitely something for Rangers to consider.
The way Scottish football is going, who can say for sure what would happen in that scenario.
I WAS a teenager when Aberdeen won the European Cup Winners Cup in Gothenburg, but I still remember it clearly. The 30-year anniversary of that match, won by John Hewitt's header, falls on Saturday. Even though they had beaten Bayern Munich in the quarter-finals I couldn't believe they had beaten beat Real Madrid in the final.
It is the kind of success from a non-Old Firm club that we probably will never see again. The fact it is still celebrated to this day just shows you what you can do if you have the right batch of players.
You wouldn't have thought the Belgian national team would find a group of players like they have, or the group of young players which have brought Boussia Dortmund back from financial difficulties.
There was still a big gap in resources those days, even if the financial divide wasn't so big, but it just shows the class of players Aberdeen had in that team. And their manager wasn't bad either.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article