Congratulations to SPL chief executive, Neil Doncaster, who delivered a remarkable increase in the league’s TV deal with Sky and ESPN; £80m for five years until 2017. The one concession he had to trade, was the possibility that he had to subjugate the link between sporting meritocracy and the commercial imperative.
When news of the deal broke yesterday a Rangers fan was quick to suggest that Sky and ESPN would not have bid on such terms if they had any doubt Rangers would survive in the league, however, later details emerged to prove the exact opposite. The entire deal is dependent on a clause assuring Celtic play Rangers four times each season. If Rangers were eliminated from the league, or even if they failed to earn enough points after an administration penalty to finish in the top six after 33 games, the TV deal becomes invalid.
While this clause was crucial in Doncaster getting his deal it does nothing for the sporting integrity of the competition. It has been five years since Rangers finished outside the top two in the league but if they go into administration, or worse, a fire sale of assets and a point deduction is likely.
The league has now introduced a contractual ceiling on whatever penalty would be applied to a financially deviant club, irrespective of the offense. Doncaster will now also set off to find a sponsor to replace Clydesdale Bank, promising the TV exposure his deal with Sky and ESPN provides. By extension, not only will TV income be dependent on four Celtic-Rangers games per season, so too will league sponsorship income.
Can you imagine the goings-on if Rangers enter next season in administration, with a 10-point deduction and a skeleton squad? Beating Rangers, making it less likely for them to reach the top six, could cost each team in the league millions. Clubs have a clear incentive to ensure Rangers are in no danger of finishing outside the top six.
Neil Doncaster, who is likely to be financially incentivised to deliver TV money, is a member of the SPL board who would decide whether or not to admit a prepack company into the league in the event of an existing club failure. His partiality would be compromised by this deal, so too would other board members from clubs without the liquidity to cope without TV or sponsor income.
While TV broadcasters have a clear financial incentive to lobby for whatever it takes to keep Rangers buoyant, the financial incentives will touch everyone with their snout in the trough, and that includes non-TV media and referees.
This is a dreadful deal as it inserts a clause which compromises the sporting integrity of the competition. Can you imagine giving the team talk to a club, safe from relegation, about to face a Rangers team needing a win on game 33? What about the referee who makes a mistake in Rangers favour, late in the season, under similar circumstances? How would Sky, ESPN and others frame the debate in the event of Rangers going into administration?
I can understand why Sky and ESPN want clause, but the rest of us might as well chuck it.
1,088 Comments- Pages:
- «
- 1
- ...
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- ...
- 26
- »
Joe Filippis Haircut says:
22 November, 2011 at 13:52
“How could that guarantee be achieved without cheating ”
Well the other way is… if Celtic or them don’t get into the top 6 (or one goes bust) then you break the deal and see what happens or arrange a friendly between us and them? Is that better than not taking the deal in the first place? … plus up until the Tax problems, the chances of it happening were very, very slight ….not worth thinking about. If you were in charge of getting the best deal for the league would you refuse the deal? I’m not standing up for them by the way… just can see why they would not refuse that deal.
Auld Neil Lennon heid says:
22 November, 2011 at 14:08
You’re preaching to the choir here, amigo. I completely agree.
Jocky Bhoy 14.05 A ten team SPL with 2 home games and two away games for each team and consign the split to the bin would ensure 4 old firm games. However, if Rangers go bust and come back as newco Rangers they would have to be allowed into the SPL to ensure the 4 games also neither Rangers or Celtic could be relegated but all the other eight teams could.This is patent nonsense and panders to cheating.H.H.
This deal will be sealed with a masonic handshake and a high five from Sepp Blatter.
bada bing
yeah the deal was due to expire at the end of this season
Spearman. 14.10 In order to achieve a TV deal that sees fair competition all clubs must be treated equally anything other than that favours the old firm. So Doncaster as the head honcho has the responsibilty to negotiate a deal that is fair to all.Now it appears he hasnt done that which leaves me as a Celtic supporter feeling very let down both by Doncaster himself and the very silent Celtic Board they appear to condone it. H.H.
31003
Thanks – Great question
SaturdaySam CSC
p.s.
Starburst used to be called Opal Fruits until 1998. Mars changed the name to bring the UK in line with its international markets. It did the same with Snickers (formerly Marathon) as part of a global branding exercise.
Half Snickers Half Marathon
* Off again, to watch the washing machine *
STV say
Celtic manager Neil Lennon has confirmed his interest in Swedish defender Mikael Lustig.
The right back is out of contract at Rosenborg at the end of December and initial discussions have taken place between the Glasgow club and the player’s representative.
Speaking ahead of his side’s game with Dunfermline Athletic, Lennon confirmed he had met with chief executive Peter Lawwell to discuss Lustig and his transfer budget for the January window.
Lustig himself said on Monday he was interested in the prospect of making the move to the Scottish Premier League, having discussed a possible transfer with international team-mate Daniel Majstorovic.
“It seems very exciting,” Lustig told Aftenposten of Celtic’s interest. “It is not the best league but it sounds interesting.
“I have not had contact with Celtic. But I can confirm my agent has had contact with the club.”
Three and away
Dare Ah say it?
Whit the Heck… Ah wull.
Guys, whether ye like or no..
We, the Celtic..
AS LONG AS WE REMAIN IN THE S.P.L..
WE NEED THE G.A.!
That is a Fact.. A Sad, Unwelcome Fact.. But..
Nevahtheless.. it is….
IRREFUTABLE!
We must have a Counterpart tae Balance the League Set Up..
There must Ayewiz be a
Yin and a Yang.. A Positive and a Negative..
A GOOD GUY in a White Hat.. and A Baddie in a Black Hat~
Godot and the Devil…
COMPETITION!!
Which is a NECESSITY,in order tae Create..and MAINTAIN.. INTEREST!!!!
and…
Fur.. Things tae go..Up and Doon…Backwards and Forwards… Roon and Roon!
In ither woids..
Tae Work!!
The Wise men o’ the Celtic Board are …REALISTS..
They understaun these things..
So..Sorry aboot That.. Guys… But….Ye wull jist hiv
tae…
Live wi’ it.
Kojo
bournesouprecipe – Just purrfect.
I’m feline like we should have a Celtic Cat News blog.
It’d give that fancy Pantaloon Duck paws for thought. (thumbsup)
Kojo
And can the league live without the Celtic support?
I doubt it.
Kojo says:
22 November, 2011 at 14:23
Maintain interest?
I would rather be bored watching the hun sink in the quicksand.
Take that back ……………….find that quite an exciting prospect.
Kojo I agree with what you are saying that is how the Celtic board see it.However, I dont agree we just have to accept it we all have a choice on how we spend our money and I am pretty sure that if the Celtic Board are seen to be assisting Rangers survival they will lose thousands of paying customers. H.H.
Celtic_First says:
22 November, 2011 at 14:09
dirtymac says:
22 November, 2011 at 13:59
Post of the day. Very funny.
—
I was being serious :-(
Dirtymac
I know you were making a serious point, but the way you wrote it was very funny. Your “toe to knee” line is genius.
cavansam \o/ says:
22 November, 2011 at 14:27
“And can the league live without the Celtic support?”
or could they survive without the FOD support… isn’t that the problem?
Paul67,
Scottish football has not been a sporting meritocracy since Rangers went down the EBT route. Their administration or liquidation was an opportunity for the game to punish the guilty and establish a notion of fair play, something which has been absent from our game for far too long.
Since Celtic FC are party to, and beneficiaries of, this new deal they are every bit as culpable as the other members of the SPL. If this proves to be the case, then this is a deal breaker for me – I won’t be renewing.
It will also make our strategy of fiscal prudence look very much the wrong one when the “successful” strategy will have been proved to be, “spend, spend more and when the bill arrives tear it up or ignore it”.
Apologies if I missed an earlier question, I’ve been taking in the delights of Ayrshire today. Have I missed anything?
I received an e-mail from Rioskorrie today concerning the unacceptable intrusion on our everyday lives by the Health and |Sfatety executive.
He didn’t provide a direct link so I have loaded the disturbing evidence here (note there is no mention of lateral movement)!….
Health and Safety Rules OK
Hail hail
Estadio
I once owned a pet orangutan called Doctor Zaius.
I tried to engage him in philosophical discussion but he just flung his own poop at me.
I suspect he was a hun.
Probably got his PhD from Strathclyde. (thumbsup)
Paul67 says:
22 November, 2011 at 14:35
Apologies if I missed an earlier question, I’ve been taking in the delights of Ayrshire today. Have I missed anything?
Aye, where is the delights of Ayrshire? :-)
Kojo
youre right but it could be a double edged sword.
There is one possible , admittedly unlikely scenario, to our advantage.
We threaten that if Rangers go into admin or worse and ARENT given the appropriate penalty that we resign from the league. Doing so results in the dreaded ” no 4 OF games ” scenario rendering the whole contract voidable.
Might give us a scenario where we agree that instead of a third division demotion they have to carry a ten point penalty for say 2/3 years.
Gives them a suitable handicap and pretty much guarantees the 4 games – that scenario gives the other teams plenty of incentive to vote for it. No tv contract disaster and a reasonable chance of picking up a european place.
Simples
PS Do cup games count toward the 4 , incidentally? –
Celtic have been given a boost as a trio of injured stars have returned to training.
Charlie Mulgrew, Glenn Loovens and Mohamed Bangura have all rejoined the first team squad at Barrowfield after time in treatment.
Though none of the three will be risked for the re-arranged Scottish Premier League match against Dunfermline on Wednesday evening, all three could come in to Neil Lennon’s plans for this weekend’s game against St Mirren.
STV
Paul67 22 November, 2011 at 14:35
Apologies if I missed an earlier question, I’ve been taking in the delights of Ayrshire today. Have I missed anything?
Hopefully none of your targets while you were in Ayrshire.
Paul67 – Is Ayrshire that place you can only reach via C.S. Lewis’ enchanted wardrobe?
How is Mr Tumnus? (thumbsup)
Paul67,
I think you are being too quick to assume the worst.
Sky/ESPN are entirely correct to stipulate their £80M deal is subject to 4 Celtic Rangers games during a season. This is a perfectly acceptable commercial condition that attaches to the price. If they were being asked to price based on the possibility of only 2 games, or perhaps none, factoring in that risk profile would greatly reduce the price.
None of Sky or ESPN’s involvement has anything to do with sporting integrity – they are interested only in commercial reality.
For Neil Doncaster, he is also perfectly correct to accept the price based on those conditions. He is not currently in a position to make a judgement on Rangers short term and long term viability. If he allowed a deal to be signed factoring in only 2 games (or no games) in a season or seasons over the next 5 years, he would stand accused of naivete if 4 games then transpired. He would have undersold the product.
This issue comes to a head if and when Rangers suffer an insolvency event. At that point sporting integrity becomes the issue, with the Sky/ESPN contract at the mercy of the decision that needs to be taken in the interests of sporting integrity. If that decision is fudged, at the point we have an issue.
Sir Paul
If ye are aroon,pal..
Whit dae ye think aboot Ma ultimate Submish..
Am Ah Right..or.. Am Ah full of the Nasty Stuff?
Ah wid like tae know whit ye think.
Kojo
Paul67 says:
22 November, 2011 at 14:35
The delights of Ayrshire???????????? Was there a hanging?
just a thought..is it poss sky could help them with their 50m,,,,,,,,on agreed pay back terms
Mo Bangura is fit again!
Rejoice!
This almost [ but not quite] makes up for the loss of the very lovely Flavia from Strictly; an inexplicable decision which defies explanation unless of course! ..it’s dose pesky Huns.
Re: The Hat.
Are you that sorting hat from Hogwarts?
Now, I’m a stalwart defender of independent schools, but I always thought it was ridiculous that a child’s academic future should be dictated by a talking hat.
Also, whose idea was it to put all the evil kids in the same house? (thumbsup)
Mo Mo Super M who ? H.H.
The delights of Ayrshire?
I’m your man for the lowdown on all Gondwanaland has to offer.
The goat tied to a lamppost is not to be missed, and the uncouth but genuine tradition of ‘Burnin’ oot the Papes’ is well worth a detour.
The Hat says:
22 November, 2011 at 14:43
Paul67,
I think you are being too quick to assume the worst.
I agree with your interpretation. SPL had no choice but to agree this deal given the present circumstances.
They and the SFA have separate integrity decisions if they face administration or insolvency. That is also where our board have to also show their sporting integrity despite financial concerns.
This is perhaps were our real fears are.
philvisreturns says:
22 November, 2011 at 14:48
Re: The Hat.
Are you that sorting hat from Hogwarts?
Now, I’m a stalwart defender of independent schools, but I always thought it was ridiculous that a child’s academic future should be dictated by a talking hat.
Also, whose idea was it to put all the evil kids in the same house? (thumbsup)
—
Kaflik skools proberly
(c) Orcdom since 1870-something
My dear,dear,dear,dear,friend.. Cavansam
Pal..
Whit diz the Celtic Support REALLY WANT?
Is it.. whit Ah suspect …
THE COMPLETE and FINAL DEMISE OF THE G.A. Fitba’ Club?
Well.. if that is the case..
Ah hiv Noos fur them.. and You..if that is Your Wish ,tae.
IT WILL NEVAH HAPPEN..
Not in OOR LIVETIME,pal…
No Way.]
This Tax Stuff will No be the END of the G.A.
Even if the case Goes Against them..’
Which… Ah am NO CERTAIN THAT IT WULL!!!!!!!
Pal..
We are Jined at the HIP wi oor Hated Rivals.. and they wull Never Go Away..
AS LONG AS WE ARE CHAINED tae the S.P.L.
Face facts,man..
And .. Stoap Dreamin’
The G.A. are the Chosen One.. the Darlin’ of the SCOTTISH Esatablishment…
We are only accepted by them…
Under Sufferance.
Kojo
yer pal…who likes ye aloater
By ‘delights of Ayrshire’, one must assume you were checking on the roads out of Udun?