Scottish Football no longer exists...

[IWasThere2016]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/exclusive-scottish-football-no-longer-10130604

Found myself unable to disagree (Hun's punishment aside)...

Thoughts??

[Big_Franck]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/exclusive-scottish-football-no-longer-10130604

Found myself unable to disagree...

Thoughts??

Can you copy and paste for those that don't want to increase hits to the ******'s website? :aok:

[Deansy]

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/sport/football/exclusive-scottish-football-no-longer-10130604

Found myself unable to disagree...

Thoughts??

Lays the blame on Roger Mitchell - hard to disagree. Just another in a very long line, who's sole interest was the OF and never shy to disparage the 'smaller clubs !'

[Just Alf]

Can you copy and paste for those that don't want to increase hits to the ******'s website? :aok:

TV anchorman Richard Keys remembers when the order came through to “shut down Scottish football - it no longer exists," after the dispute between satellite giants Sky TV and Roger Mitchell.


Richard Keys had a seat inside Sky TV’s high command when the order came through from above: “Shut down Scottish football. It no longer exists.”

That was 15 years ago. But Keys believes the game in this country is still paying the price.

And yesterday, when the TV anchorman read Record Sport’s expose on the paltry broadcast deal that is keeping our game locked in Europe’s poor house, his mind immediately raced back to that mean-spirited dispute between the satellite giants and Roger Mitchell – a row he blames for our game’s financial plight.

Richard Keys says the game is still paying the price for deal flop
Yesterday, we mapped out the paucity of the SPFL’s TV deals with Sky and BT Sport by comparing them with mega-money contracts being handed out in countries across the Continent.

While Scotland’s clubs scrape by on a share of £18.75million for the rights to 60 live games per season, 17 other leagues are raking in relative fortunes.

From £1.71billion per season in England to £46m a year in Denmark and £50m in Greece, our game has been frozen out of football’s broadcast fortunes. Keys caught up with our figures as he boarded a flight from Heathrow to Doha, where he hosts live football every weekend for big-spending Qataris beIN SPORTS.

And he said: “I wasn’t surprised by them, I was astounded by them. The sums are frightening.

“It’s a crying shame the way Scottish football is being treated. In fact it’s beyond a crying shame – it’s a disgrace.”

And Keys knows what he’s talking about. He had a ringside seat when former SPL chief executive Mitchell picked a fight with the heavyweight executive at the top of Sky’s empire, Vic Wakeling. And got knocked out cold.

Even now when Keys shuts his eyes he can still hear Scottish football’s bones being crushed. He said: “You can trace it all back to 2002 and the deal Vic Wakeling didn’t do with Roger Mitchell who was in charge of the SPL – but who wasn’t very good at it.

Former SPL chief Roger Mitchell (Photo: Daily Record)
“Vic put something like £60m on the table and the response was, ‘Come back to me when you’re serious’. Vic withdrew the offer and overnight he made it clear we were to stop talking about Scottish football on Sky Sports News which was a disgrace in itself.

“The instruction was, ‘Scottish football doesn’t exist. Shut it down. We don’t talk about it, we’re not interested in it until they come back to the table on our terms’.

“It really was a disgrace and in my view Scottish football has never recovered. Scottish football has made some extraordinary decisions domestically which I didn’t understand but which have had a very detrimental effect on the game. And you know what I’m referring to.

“All these years on still no one can tell me what Rangers were guilty of when they were sent down to the bottom tier.

“The expectation was they would be found guilty but my understanding is they were never convicted of any wrong- doing. But I guess that’s another matter entirely.”

Keys stayed at Sky for nine more years before leaving under a cloud of controversy in 2011.

But in his next job, with TalkSPORT, he was quick to reconnect with the Scottish game – and to understand its value.

He said: “When we went to Talksport I was very much aware that the station was broadcast nationally. But that we only ever talked about English football. I said when I went there I wanted our show to have an audience of over one million. I was told we would never do it.

“So after a week or so I told them I wanted a full set of newspapers delivered every morning, including in particular the Daily Record because I wanted to know what was happening in Scotland.

Richard Keys with Andy Gray
“The only reason I knew what was happening at Rangers in 2011 was because I started reading the Daily Record. And that’s when we started covering it properly.

“Effectively we broke the story in England because no one else down here had been paying attention to what the Record had been writing.

“A club the size of Rangers going bust? This was a huge story – it was cataclysmic – but no one in England cared about or even knew about it until TalkSPORT picked it up.

“When we left that station our audience was 1.25m and a large part of that was the decision to show a genuine, grown-up interest in Scottish football. I’m not sure any of the major British broadcasters have done so since. Too many people who live and work in London and who broadcast from London believe the UK ends at Berwick.”

Keys was the frontman for the big TV relaunch of England’s top flight in 1992. And that experience has convinced him Scottish football can also be completely over-hauled if the big broadcasters are prepared to pay it the going rate.

He said: “I don’t buy into the theory they won’t pay proper money for it because it’s not a very good product because when we set up the Premier League in England it wasn’t a very good product either.

A live broadcast from Celtic Park
“It only is what it is today because of the amount of TV money that’s been poured into it. Unless you commit to it in that way you can’t expect it to be better.

“What you certainly can’t do is expect the product to get better by completely ignoring it the way Sky is just now.

“The problem is they got stung massively in the last round of negotiations for the rights to the Premier League. As a result Sky are now paying £11m a game.

“On any given weekend they’re paying £55m to put five games on and that’s just for the rights, never mind all the staff and technology involved in such big live broadcasts.

“So something had to give. They lost things like speedway and all the other stuff around the periphery. The attitude was, ‘If we can nick Scottish football then let’s do that’. It’s time football people in Scotland demanded a far better deal.”

[Bostonhibby]

Wild guess, is it because the rangers failed to win their first ever Scottish cup last year or that the yams famous old stand is being demolished?

[Since90+2]

Surprise surprise a Daily Record article that supports the theory that Rangers didnt deserve their punishment ect. Perhaps the journalist could have pointed out to Keys that the club seized to exist and were given a place in the league system ahead of other clubs.

[snooky]

Move along. Nothing happening here. It's just the DR playing with itself.

“So after a week or so I told them I wanted a full set of newspapers delivered every morning, including in particular the Daily Record because I wanted to know what was happening in Scotland.

Richard Keys with Andy Gray
“The only reason I knew what was happening at Rangers in 2011 was because I started reading the Daily Record. And that’s when we started covering it properly.

[Craig_HFC]

So this'll be why Gibbon Mitts is so ill informed... he reads the Daily Record.

[IWasThere2016]

Wild guess, is it because the rangers failed to win their first ever Scottish cup last year or that the yams famous old stand is being demolished?

:greengrin


Lays the blame on Roger Mitchell - hard to disagree. Just another in a very long line, who's sole interest was the OF and never shy to disparage the 'smaller clubs !'

But what changes? Something has to give .. our game is dying a slow and painful death.. IMHO

[GreenLake]

Rejected £60m in 2002?

Now we can't get £20m in 2017.

Adjust for inflation and it's worse.

Worse still, Richard Keys can't see how The Rangers were made to reapply to the bottom tier. Has he completely lost his mind?

[ancient hibee]

:greengrin



But what changes? Something has to give .. our game is dying a slow and painful death.. IMHO

And yet one club I know of is playing in front of its biggest average gates for decades.

[IWasThere2016]

And yet one club I know of is playing in front of its biggest average gates for decades.

And imagine if the fitba was good :wink:

[where'stheslope]

This was even brought up in Parliament, about the equality of funding as English Premiership receives £1.7 million we should be getting around 1/10 or 10% of that amount. Just think what that could do to our game up here!!!!

[Ozyhibby]

Now I don't feel so bad about watching all the sky channels for free on Kodi. [emoji23]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[CMurdoch]

It is a disgrace.
We should at least be getting the same as Denmark.
No wonder our teams have struggled for the last 15 years.
If Keys story true Mitchell really ****ed up.
Importantly this is the reason Scottish fans have to pay such high admission charges.

[DarlingtonHibee]

If I remember the clowns went for setanta, and when that went wrong sky had them begging

[Ozyhibby]

It is a disgrace.
We should at least be getting the same as Denmark.
No wonder our teams have struggled for the last 15 years.
If Keys story true Mitchell really ****ed up.
Importantly this is the reason Scottish fans have to pay such high admission charges.

Maybe Mitchell was right to ask for more? Maybe Sky were just being malevolent b******'s?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Viva_Palmeiras]

So Sky are the King Makers and deals need to be conducted on their terms. Sounds about right.

We reap what we sow. We had the audacity to go with another provider and Sky made an example of Scottish Football - allowing it to wither on the vine.

But Sky subscribers are unfortunately complicity in this.

[Jones28]

What a complete cock up. "Scotlands Game" on the Beeb did a feature on the tv money (in the first episode I believe) and I remember watching it thinking how on earth did Scottish football **** this one up?

[Ozyhibby]

So Sky are the King Makers and deals need to be conducted on their terms. Sounds about right.

We reap what we sow. We had the audacity to go with another provider and Sky made an example of Scottish Football - allowing it to wither on the vine.

But Sky subscribers are unfortunately complicity in this.

That's exactly right. Scottish footy fans are their own worst enemy. How many support teams in England they have no real connection with except through Sky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bostonhibby]

That's exactly right. Scottish footy fans are their own worst enemy. How many support teams in England they have no real connection with except through Sky.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ditch sky until they contribute in proportion to their subscribers and income derived from Scotland?

[Spike Mandela]

A man sacked for his pathetic attitude towards women, relays a story about the Murdoch empire vindictively crushing Scottish football finances then goes on to splaff a load of **** about the cheating club that that died 5 years ago.

If ever I wish I could unread an article it would be this pile of Daily Rectum pish.

[jacomo]

Rejected £60m in 2002?

Now we can't get £20m in 2017.

Adjust for inflation and it's worse.

Worse still, Richard Keys can't see how The Rangers were made to reapply to the bottom tier. Has he completely lost his mind?


He also criticises Scottish football for demanding more in 2002 and now says Scottish football should demand more.

The man's a moron - but he does highlight some of the issues we face. To earn so much less than Danish football is shocking.

Regan and Doncaster need to go.

[lord bunberry]

A man sacked for his pathetic attitude towards women, relays a story about the Murdoch empire vindictively crushing Scottish football finances then goes on to splaff a load of **** about the cheating club that that died 5 years ago.

If ever I wish I could unread an article it would be this pile of Daily Rectum pish.
I don't think he was sacked, was it not Andy Gray that was sacked?

[NAE NOOKIE]

Apart from an insight into the thinking of SKY executives back in the day there isn't much new in the article. What it does do is reinforce what we all know about the Daily Record .... it appears everybody but them and the folk they give a voice to 'know what Rangers did' ... they ceased to exist and a new club were allowed to join the bottom league of Scottish football, ahead of other clubs who had a better moral claim to that position.

As for 'Talk Sport' ...... If Richard Keys acted as a driving force to get them to talk about Scottish football then the minute he walked out the door that attitude changed big time .... in spit of the fact that two of their main shows are fronted by Scots in Alan Brazil and Jim White their only Scottish football content is to constantly remind us of how Celtic's dominance ruins the game .... dazzling insight.

As another poster alluded to ... they cant seem to find it within themselves to point out the positives, like the combined attendances of Edinburgh's two clubs being at their highest for nearly half a century ...... mind you, the other stations including BBC Scotland seem incapable of highlighting what is clearly a positive about our game and even worse the SFA / SPFL also seem unwilling or unable to use to their advantage one of the few clear success stories within Scottish football in recent seasons, what a condemnation of their lack of competence ...... when 19,000 folk turned out on a Friday night to watch two non Glasgow Championship clubs go toe to toe in a game that was live on free TV they should have thrown a bloody media party .... instead they failed entirely to make use of what was a good publicity open goal.

The one thing the article has got right is to point out that there are leagues in Europe similar in size to Scotland who couldn't hope to match our product, perhaps not so much in the quality of the football, but in so far as historic rivalries go, who have much better TV deals than we do ...... we have a number of attractive on field battles to promote over and above the obvious one .... as a neutral fan I would rather see two clubs with a bitter rivalry batter lumps out of each other than watch two silky but uninteresting clubs go at it .... as I've said before, I would rather watch Sheffield Wednesday play Sheffield United or Dundee v Dundee Utd any old day than Arsenal v Southampton or Man Utd v Burnley from the EPL.

Time we talked up our game instead of constantly allowing the doom and gloomers the high ground.

[Deansy]

Keys - 'All these years on still no one can tell me what Rangers were guilty of when they were sent down to the bottom tier'


But then goes on to say -


“The only reason I knew what was happening at Rangers in 2011 was because I started reading the Daily Record'

:dunno:


Confirmation that reading the 'Daily Rectum' is totally and utterly pointless - you learn nothing !



On reflection, not comletely true, you WILL learn that the 'Rectum' is rather fond of Rangers.

[CMurdoch]

Denmark has a similar population to Scotland but their TV deal according to the article is for £46 million per season compared to our £19 million.

However, the unfairness is far far greater when you discover that the Danes are not that interested in football compared to the Scots.

Their 2 best supported teams average only 12,000 supporters and the 3rd best supported team attract an average of less than 8,000.
In their second tier the best supported team gets an average 1,600 supporters.

Basically if it wasn't for Scottish Football Fans supporting their teams in such large numbers Scottish football would be at the level of the League of Ireland.

It is a disgrace.
Scottish football fans should be taking direct action by cancelling their subscriptions to Sky etc.

[easty]

He also criticises Scottish football for demanding more in 2002 and now says Scottish football should demand more.

The man's a moron - but he does highlight some of the issues we face. To earn so much less than Danish football is shocking.

Regan and Doncaster need to go.

He criticises us for asking more than £60m back then though, so it's not as thought he's contradicting himself. We should be asking for more than the *****y deal we have now.

[Since90+2]

Hopefully BT Sport can takeover from Sky and get exclusive rights to Scottish Football and pay the going rate for it. I would imagine that may result in a few cancelled subscriptions for Sky Sports.

[Bishop Hibee]

We should be holding the broadcast companies to ransom not giving the rights away cheaply. They have Channel space to fill. Who the **** watches 2 Bundesliga live on BT? The viewing figures must be tiny. I only ever take the sports channels if Virgin Media offers them free as a carrot to sign up for another year.

[percy veer]

We should be holding the broadcast companies to ransom not giving the rights away cheaply. They have Channel space to fill. Who the **** watches 2 Bundesliga live on BT? The viewing figures must be tiny. I only ever take the sports channels if Virgin Media offers them free as a carrot to sign up for another year.


I personally would let the club run it themselves hibs hearts games negotiate a price same against rangers and celtic possibly Aberdeen, the rest 3 clock on a sat for me .

[where'stheslope]

Denmark has a similar population to Scotland but their TV deal according to the article is for £46 million per season compared to our £19 million.

However, the unfairness is far far greater when you discover that the Danes are not that interested in football compared to the Scots.

Their 2 best supported teams average only 12,000 supporters and the 3rd best supported team attract an average of less than 8,000.
In their second tier the best supported team gets an average 1,600 supporters.

Basically if it wasn't for Scottish Football Fans supporting their teams in such large numbers Scottish football would be at the level of the League of Ireland.

It is a disgrace.
Scottish football fans should be taking direct action by cancelling their subscriptions to Sky etc.

Just Googled Denmark football, and was surprised that they have 2 Professional Leagues containing 14 in the Super League, and 12 in the 1st Division.
The rest of the football teams are regionalised in 4 other leagues.
So if we are comparable to them in population yet we have twice as many teams in our Professional Leagues, surely we are trying to accommodate
to many teams.
This only means that no matter how much money is paid, we have to split it more ways.
Its difficult to lose teams from our league system but it may be the only way to become viable.

[madhibee_again]

Denmark has a similar population to Scotland but their TV deal according to the article is for £46 million per season compared to our £19 million.

However, the unfairness is far far greater when you discover that the Danes are not that interested in football compared to the Scots.

Their 2 best supported teams average only 12,000 supporters and the 3rd best supported team attract an average of less than 8,000.
In their second tier the best supported team gets an average 1,600 supporters.

Basically if it wasn't for Scottish Football Fans supporting their teams in such large numbers Scottish football would be at the level of the League of Ireland.

It is a disgrace.
Scottish football fans should be taking direct action by cancelling their subscriptions to Sky etc.

Exactly why we should be comparing our footballing achievements to the likes of Denmark, Norway even Belgium instead of south of the border.

https://thesliderulepass.wordpress.com/2017/03/12/scottish-football-debunking-the-myth/

[matty_f]

Scottish football has almost no bargaining position now though, we can't really demand anything - neither Sky nor BT see Scottish football as a deal breaker, and they both know that the SPFL can't afford to miss out on a TV deal, so they both have a much stronger hand than the SPFL.

If the SPFL had any sort of clue they'd put together a package that highlighted what the SPFL could be with the proper investment - rather than looking at it from the viewpoint that there are only the four Celtc v The Rangers games a season that are worth watching (with the possibility of 4 Edinburgh derbies to bolster it) as things are just now, they should be looking to get agreement that x amount of the TV money will be used to attract players that will significantly improve the quality of the teams overall.

Sky (and latterly BT) built the Premiership up from a decent league to one of the (if not the) most watched and sellable leagues on the planet. They invested enough money that clubs could use to attract top quality players, and that in turn made it more sellable, so attracted even more money, and so on.

There is potential for 5 of the Scottish Clubs to attract really good players if the investment was there. The Glasgow teams, us and the Yams, and Aberdeen probably hold enough pull that if the money was right we could pick up known players that would generate interest.

We're never going to get the Ronaldos or Messis of the world, but you can see the attention The Rangers got when they signed Barton - Celtc when they had the likes of Bellamy and even now when they've got Sinclair and Dembele.

Scottish football has massive potential but we need people in who can actually demonstrate the value it could have beyond just appeal of the four Glasgow derbies each season. As marketable as those games undoubtedly are, Scottish football has much more to offer.

Even the top six split and the play-offs give the league excitement beyond wondering how quickly Celtc can win it. If Sky or BT lumped a good chunk of money at Scotland then the rewards are there. It's just a shame we don't have anyone with the gumption to sell it.

[JimBHibees]

Apart from an insight into the thinking of SKY executives back in the day there isn't much new in the article. What it does do is reinforce what we all know about the Daily Record .... it appears everybody but them and the folk they give a voice to 'know what Rangers did' ... they ceased to exist and a new club were allowed to join the bottom league of Scottish football, ahead of other clubs who had a better moral claim to that position.

As for 'Talk Sport' ...... If Richard Keys acted as a driving force to get them to talk about Scottish football then the minute he walked out the door that attitude changed big time .... in spit of the fact that two of their main shows are fronted by Scots in Alan Brazil and Jim White their only Scottish football content is to constantly remind us of how Celtic's dominance ruins the game .... dazzling insight.

As another poster alluded to ... they cant seem to find it within themselves to point out the positives, like the combined attendances of Edinburgh's two clubs being at their highest for nearly half a century ...... mind you, the other stations including BBC Scotland seem incapable of highlighting what is clearly a positive about our game and even worse the SFA / SPFL also seem unwilling or unable to use to their advantage one of the few clear success stories within Scottish football in recent seasons, what a condemnation of their lack of competence ...... when 19,000 folk turned out on a Friday night to watch two non Glasgow Championship clubs go toe to toe in a game that was live on free TV they should have thrown a bloody media party .... instead they failed entirely to make use of what was a good publicity open goal.

The one thing the article has got right is to point out that there are leagues in Europe similar in size to Scotland who couldn't hope to match our product, perhaps not so much in the quality of the football, but in so far as historic rivalries go, who have much better TV deals than we do ...... we have a number of attractive on field battles to promote over and above the obvious one .... as a neutral fan I would rather see two clubs with a bitter rivalry batter lumps out of each other than watch two silky but uninteresting clubs go at it .... as I've said before, I would rather watch Sheffield Wednesday play Sheffield United or Dundee v Dundee Utd any old day than Arsenal v Southampton or Man Utd v Burnley from the EPL.

Time we talked up our game instead of constantly allowing the doom and gloomers the high ground.

Brilliant post. Well done. :flag::not worth

[jgl07]

Just Googled Denmark football, and was surprised that they have 2 Professional Leagues containing 14 in the Super League, and 12 in the 1st Division.
The rest of the football teams are regionalised in 4 other leagues.
So if we are comparable to them in population yet we have twice as many teams in our Professional Leagues, surely we are trying to accommodate to many teams.
This only means that no matter how much money is paid, we have to split it more ways.
Its difficult to lose teams from our league system but it may be the only way to become viable.
But bugger all goes to the clubs outside the top 12. Very little goes to those outside the top two/three. Spurious arguments that putting, say, East Fife out of business will 'benefit' Scottish football. All total bollox.

In any event twice as many people watch Scottish Football as watch in Denmark.

It's all about competitiveness. The Scottish League has not been competitive since the days when Hearts bottled things in 1986 and Aberdeen missed out to Rangers two or three years later. It's worse than ever now with Celtic 25 points clear with a quarter of the season to go.

The Danish League is less predictable and eight different teams have won the championship in the last twenty five years: FC Copenhagen, FC Midtjylland, AaB, FC Nordsjælland, Brøndby IF, Herfølge BK, Silkeborg IF, and Lyngby BK.

And how many teams have won the Scottish title over that period? Two: Rangers and Celtic. How many teams are likely to win the SFPL Premiership title in the next 25 years? Probably one: Celtic.

No further questions m'lud!

[Malthibby]

Scottish football has almost no bargaining position now though, we can't really demand anything - neither Sky nor BT see Scottish football as a deal breaker, and they both know that the SPFL can't afford to miss out on a TV deal, so they both have a much stronger hand than the SPFL.

If the SPFL had any sort of clue they'd put together a package that highlighted what the SPFL could be with the proper investment - rather than looking at it from the viewpoint that there are only the four Celtc v The Rangers games a season that are worth watching (with the possibility of 4 Edinburgh derbies to bolster it) as things are just now, they should be looking to get agreement that x amount of the TV money will be used to attract players that will significantly improve the quality of the teams overall.

Sky (and latterly BT) built the Premiership up from a decent league to one of the (if not the) most watched and sellable leagues on the planet. They invested enough money that clubs could use to attract top quality players, and that in turn made it more sellable, so attracted even more money, and so on.

There is potential for 5 of the Scottish Clubs to attract really good players if the investment was there. The Glasgow teams, us and the Yams, and Aberdeen probably hold enough pull that if the money was right we could pick up known players that would generate interest.

We're never going to get the Ronaldos or Messis of the world, but you can see the attention The Rangers got when they signed Barton - Celtc when they had the likes of Bellamy and even now when they've got Sinclair and Dembele. Scottish football has massive potential but we need people in who can actually demonstrate the value it could have beyond just appeal of the four Glasgow derbies each season. As marketable as those games undoubtedly are, Scottish football has much more to offer.

Even the top six split and the play-offs give the league excitement beyond wondering how quickly Celtc can win it. If Sky or BT lumped a good chunk of money at Scotland then the rewards are there. It's just a shame we don't have anyone with the gumption to sell it.


What he said. Scottish Footie's run by folk with the imagination and vision of my arse, & it produces better sheite. We have said it so many times, the clubs need to get together, get shot of these imposters & force change.
In the meantime cancel your Sky Sports subscriptions - if we didn't know bwfore we do now; they have shafted Scottish Football.

GG

[CMurdoch]

The average attendances in the SPL are higher than every European country bar Holland and the big 5 (Germany, England, Spain, Italy & France). Accordingly this level of interest should attract the 7th biggest TV contract not the bag of ***** we currently receive.

[where'stheslope]

The average attendances in the SPL are higher than every European country bar Holland and the big 5 (Germany, England, Spain, Italy & France). Accordingly this level of interest should attract the 7th biggest TV contract not the bag of ***** we currently receive.

That is a fantastic statistic!

Other than Rangers Celtic Aberdeen Us and the yams the rest rarely get into 5 figures?

Unless its an accumulation of all attendances, if it is Rangers and Celtic would be in the top 5 themselves without the rest of us???

On the money side it was all lost when Rangers and Celtic wanted a bigger share as they had most supporters at their games!!!

[Bostonhibby]

I don't think he was sacked, was it not Andy Gray that was sacked?
Two cheeks same bigoted, bloated uninformed erse springs to mind?

Either that or someone didn't fancy sacking two balloons in the same day.

[Mikers110]

Just an observation, but there was no Sky or BT in 67 when Celtic won the European cup or teams like Hibs, Dundee, Kilmarnock and Oldco etc were getting to the later stages of European competition and the national team were respected worldwide. the problems in Scottish football run far deeper than tv deals. Maybe if we got a product on the pitch that was actually attractive to tv companies then we would be in a better bargaining position.

[DavieRoy]

What next, Richard Keys hosting coffee mornings for the Woman's Institute! It is not as if he has an axe to grind!

He forgets Sky Sports still had Scottish Cup and Scotland home games between 2002 and 2009 when they didn't have the SPL.

The reason the SPL was created was to get on the Sky gravy train, the breakaway league, pushed through by our then chairman Lex Gold and we then get relegated!

Sky offered the same money in 2002 as they did in 1998, the clubs and Roger Mitchell rejected it and they had to take an offer worse even less. No wonder Sky went mental.

The Scottish FA kept there deal and have kept getting an increase. This is what gets missed, the SP(F)L keep making an arse of it but the SFA keep getting better TV deals.


The story also is misleading, yes 2002 took the SPL off the gravy train but remember in 2008, Sky bid £120 million, much more than they are paying now, Aberdeen, Celtic and Rangers voted for it, but the rest of the league voted for Setanta at £125 million. They went bust and Sky/ESPN, picked the deal up at the previous Setanta deal price.

So we don't deserve anything if the business people running clubs and league officials don't do their due dilligence.

I read an article with Gordon Smith, who was in charge of the Scottish FA then, he said he was warned about Setanta and told to use them only as a stocking horse, also in 2008. He did and got an increase and great terms from Sky and BBC.

To me, it appears like Sky and other channels will pay if they have to but if our chairmen and officials can't negotiate with any sort of bargining position like the Scottish FA then we will struggle.

Richard Keys, what is the World coming to.

[hibeedonald]

Denmark has a similar population to Scotland but their TV deal according to the article is for £46 million per season compared to our £19 million.

However, the unfairness is far far greater when you discover that the Danes are not that interested in football compared to the Scots.

Their 2 best supported teams average only 12,000 supporters and the 3rd best supported team attract an average of less than 8,000.
In their second tier the best supported team gets an average 1,600 supporters.

Basically if it wasn't for Scottish Football Fans supporting their teams in such large numbers Scottish football would be at the level of the League of Ireland.

It is a disgrace.
Scottish football fans should be taking direct action by cancelling their subscriptions to Sky etc.

That's mental

[Michael]

Just an observation, but there was no Sky or BT in 67 when Celtic won the European cup or teams like Hibs, Dundee, Kilmarnock and Oldco etc were getting to the later stages of European competition and the national team were respected worldwide. the problems in Scottish football run far deeper than tv deals. Maybe if we got a product on the pitch that was actually attractive to tv companies then we would be in a better bargaining position.

Bosman ruling means it's all about who's the richest now.

The quality of Scottish players has declined, but the European clubs in the bigger nations are so strong now that it's unthinkable for Scottish clubs to do well in Europe.

[DavieRoy]

That's mental

No it's not.

Look at my post above. This isn't handout Scotland, Sky and BT get it on the cheap because the chairmen and league can't negotiate properly.

I have just said, the Scottish FA have very good TV deals, so why can't the SPFL? Because they are inept.

They had an offer from Sky in 2008 of £120 million they didn't take it.

If they did, what would they be paying now? More than that with a lot more coverage.

We can get annoyed with TV companies but they are businesses, our clubs have made a mess of it by themselves, it shows you how the papers work when they blame it on TV as they are competitors, when the story should be Doncaster and clubs making bad deals and wrong choices.

If I were Sky and was knocked back in 2002 and 2008, then I would hold a grudge, hence the SFA get good deals and the SPFL don't. The SFA have had good Scottish Cup deals with Sky and BBC since 1998. The SPFL can't even get a Saturday night highlights show negotiated, the SFA can.

[Jack Hackett]

No it's not.

Look at my post above. This isn't handout Scotland, Sky and BT get it on the cheap because the chairmen and league can't negotiate properly.

I have just said, the Scottish FA have very good TV deals, so why can't the SPFL? Because they are inept.

They had an offer from Sky in 2008 of £120 million they didn't take it.

If they did, what would they be paying now? More than that with a lot more coverage.

We can get annoyed with TV companies but they are businesses, our clubs have made a mess of it by themselves, it shows you how the papers work when they blame it on TV as they are competitors, when the story should be Doncaster and clubs making bad deals and wrong choices.

If I were Sky and was knocked back in 2002 and 2008, then I would hold a grudge, hence the SFA get good deals and the SPFL don't. The SFA have had good Scottish Cup deals with Sky and BBC since 1998. The SPFL can't even get a Saturday night highlights show negotiated, the SFA can.

The inexplicable part of all of this is that Doncaster still has a job...indeed gets substantial pay rises. The clubs are culpable for continuing to employ him.

[Joe6-2]

No one down south interested in Rangers?!!! Really??

[GreenLake]

Apart from an insight into the thinking of SKY executives back in the day there isn't much new in the article. What it does do is reinforce what we all know about the Daily Record .... it appears everybody but them and the folk they give a voice to 'know what Rangers did' ... they ceased to exist and a new club were allowed to join the bottom league of Scottish football, ahead of other clubs who had a better moral claim to that position.

As for 'Talk Sport' ...... If Richard Keys acted as a driving force to get them to talk about Scottish football then the minute he walked out the door that attitude changed big time .... in spit of the fact that two of their main shows are fronted by Scots in Alan Brazil and Jim White their only Scottish football content is to constantly remind us of how Celtic's dominance ruins the game .... dazzling insight.

As another poster alluded to ... they cant seem to find it within themselves to point out the positives, like the combined attendances of Edinburgh's two clubs being at their highest for nearly half a century ...... mind you, the other stations including BBC Scotland seem incapable of highlighting what is clearly a positive about our game and even worse the SFA / SPFL also seem unwilling or unable to use to their advantage one of the few clear success stories within Scottish football in recent seasons, what a condemnation of their lack of competence ...... when 19,000 folk turned out on a Friday night to watch two non Glasgow Championship clubs go toe to toe in a game that was live on free TV they should have thrown a bloody media party .... instead they failed entirely to make use of what was a good publicity open goal.

The one thing the article has got right is to point out that there are leagues in Europe similar in size to Scotland who couldn't hope to match our product, perhaps not so much in the quality of the football, but in so far as historic rivalries go, who have much better TV deals than we do ...... we have a number of attractive on field battles to promote over and above the obvious one .... as a neutral fan I would rather see two clubs with a bitter rivalry batter lumps out of each other than watch two silky but uninteresting clubs go at it .... as I've said before, I would rather watch Sheffield Wednesday play Sheffield United or Dundee v Dundee Utd any old day than Arsenal v Southampton or Man Utd v Burnley from the EPL.

Time we talked up our game instead of constantly allowing the doom and gloomers the high ground.

Unfortunately, anti-football does not appeal to the rest of the global TV market and we suffer financially by tolerating it.

[hibsbollah]

A man sacked for his pathetic attitude towards women, relays a story about the Murdoch empire vindictively crushing Scottish football finances then goes on to splaff a load of **** about the cheating club that that died 5 years ago.

If ever I wish I could unread an article it would be this pile of Daily Rectum pish.

Exactly. Sky as the magnanimous benefactor :faf: :rolleyes:

[magpie1892]

Yet more (!) utter pish from the DR.

The offer from Sky (via Vic Wakeling - who's mates with my dad (don't let that sway you, I think my dad's a ****)) was a superb one at the time.

Mitchell made a huge error in thinking he could get more, and was not at all shy in letting Sky know this, except that he did this in terms which were much more forthright than the Rectum 'reports'. Wakeling did not take this well but just wrote it off.

When Mitchell's idea for SPLTV attracted about seven potential subscribers, and he had to go back to Sky/Wakeling with cap in hand, both parties knew that Sky had them by the nads. Mitchell wasn't guilty of greed, just stupidity. Wakeling wasn't guilty of vindictiveness, just business sense.

A product is worth what people will pay for it. Like Tore Andre Flo, for example.

[DavieRoy]

Yet more (!) utter pish from the DR.

The offer from Sky (via Vic Wakeling - who's mates with my dad (don't let that sway you, I think my dad's a ****)) was a superb one at the time.

Mitchell made a huge error in thinking he could get more, and was not at all shy in letting Sky know this, except that he did this in terms which were much more forthright than the Rectum 'reports'. Wakeling did not take this well but just wrote it off.

When Mitchell's idea for SPLTV attracted about seven potential subscribers, and he had to go back to Sky/Wakeling with cap in hand, both parties knew that Sky had them by the nads. Mitchell wasn't guilty of greed, just stupidity. Wakeling wasn't guilty of vindictiveness, just business sense.

A product is worth what people will pay for it. Like Tore Andre Flo, for example.

Spot on.

Sky didn't walk away, they paid the Scottish FA good terms for the Scottish Cup and Scotland games as they still do today, some of that via UEFA now.

The SPL made the wrong choice. We were on the gravy train.

People go on about 2002 but 2008 was the reason we are where we are now, backing Setanta. The Scottish FA went for Sky.

We all know Sky and BT get the deal dirt cheap but they are running a business and they have taken advantage of Mickey Mouse chairman and office bearers.

We don't deserve any more than what we get if our clubs can't negotiate properly.

[hibsbollah]

Yet more (!) utter pish from the DR.

The offer from Sky (via Vic Wakeling - who's mates with my dad (don't let that sway you, I think my dad's a ****)) was a superb one at the time.

Mitchell made a huge error in thinking he could get more, and was not at all shy in letting Sky know this, except that he did this in terms which were much more forthright than the Rectum 'reports'. Wakeling did not take this well but just wrote it off.

When Mitchell's idea for SPLTV attracted about seven potential subscribers, and he had to go back to Sky/Wakeling with cap in hand, both parties knew that Sky had them by the nads. Mitchell wasn't guilty of greed, just stupidity. Wakeling wasn't guilty of vindictiveness, just business sense.

A product is worth what people will pay for it. Like Tore Andre Flo, for example.

Since you're basically repeating almost the entire content of the DR piece as fact, and agreeing with the points they are making, I'm confused as to why you start your post by saying it's 'utter pish' :dunno: