It simply couldn’t live up to the hype.
Less of a decisive "Super Saturday"; more of a score draw from the fourth round of the Scottish Cup.
There’s still a long way to go to the final.
And in the best traditions of the cup, the House of Commons will now take to the pitch for a replay – possibly as soon as today with another meaningful vote on Brexit.
Referee John Bercow might have something to say about that though, and it looks like VAR will be needed to work out if it counts as a legal repeat or not.
For all their huffing and puffing, the odds are still against the Tories emerging victorious in this gruelling match.
Yesterday, bookies were offering 2/1 that the UK leaves the EU on Hallowe'en, but just 2/5 that we’re still a member.
The best that Boris Johnson can hope for is that he gets his deal through and only a short technical extension is required.
But what will the deal look like by the time it reaches the end of the legislative process?
It may be significantly different to the document the Prime Minister triumphantly returned from Brussels with.
The Government is said to be confident it "has the numbers" to pass the Withdrawal Bill, although the numbers are likely there to amend it as well.
It feels like an eternity ago, but last spring there were a series of indicative votes on the Brexit options.
Not one single option secured a majority, but Ken Clarke put forward a customs union plan requiring any Brexit deal to include – as a minimum - a commitment to negotiate a "permanent and comprehensive UK-wide customs union with the EU".
It would ensure the UK and EU maintain a closer trading relationship, with the UK applying the same tariffs to imported goods coming from around the world as the EU: a much softer Brexit.
It was defeated by the smallest margin in the first round of indicative votes, falling short by just six votes, and in the second round it was even closer – only three votes in it.
The SNP abstained, and the LibDems – then with fewer MPs – were split, with some including leader Jo Swinson voting against and others abstaining.
With the Brexit deadline just days away, could some now change their mind?
Labour MP Gloria De Piero has made clear this will be her priority, tweeting yesterday: “I am convinced we can get majority support for it.”
Even if the SNP and some LibDems still sit on their hands, a customs union for the entire UK may even be palatable for the DUP. Its MPs voted against the idea in April, but could they now compromise to avoid regulatory checks in the Irish Sea? Some Westminster insiders think so.
If Mr Johnson does emerge from this bruising game as a winner and the UK leaves the EU before the end of the year, it appears increasingly likely that his opponents will have significantly changed the definition of a victory.
But what of the spectators? The hundreds of thousands who marched on London at the weekend to demand a People’s Vote on Brexit.
It’s an idea that now has the support of 46 per cent of people in Scotland, compared to only 26%t who would prefer a General Election – with 27% unsure – according to a Panelbase poll published yesterday.
The team campaigning for a confirmatory referendum started life in the lower leagues, but has now reached the Premiership. Victory remains a difficult prospect, yet far from impossible.
In the indicative votes the proposal fell short by just 12. Could some of the Tories and former Tories who were previously opposed now be persuaded this is clearly the best way out of this mess? Perhaps.
Could the two SNP abstainers, Pete Wishart and Angus MacNeil, join the "Aye" lobby? That seems unlikely, with the Nationalist leadership seemingly backing away from full-throated support for a People’s Vote.
But the DUP has said it will examine all amendments.
Could its MPs be persuaded that this is a safer option than allowing regulatory divergence to happen? A cup shock certainly, but they do happen.
Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer yesterday said Labour will this week back an amendment for a confirmatory referendum.
Unfortunately for Labour, just as it finally gets its act together on the pitch, victory looks further away than ever.
Too much dithering with the ball in months gone by has left it languishing in the polls.
And there remains a very real possibility that Mr Johnson’s deal could ultimately pass with the support of a few Labour MPs.
Even if they represent a Leave-voting constituency, anyone in the Labour Party supporting the Prime Minister’s Brexit deal is betraying everything that the party is supposed to stand for.
How on earth can they convince themselves to trust Boris Johnson to protect workers’ rights?
If this scenario comes to pass, Labour will be blamed for facilitating Brexit.
And it’s SNP politicians who will be celebrating. In fact, it could be said this match is rigged: the SNP can win, whatever happens.
If Mr Johnson gets his Withdrawal Bill through with the help of Labour votes, the Nationalists will not let anyone in Scotland forget that. It will be a reverse-1979 moment, when the SNP was blamed for ushering in the Thatcher era.
Whenever the General Election comes, and it will be soon, the SNP will sweep up.
But if the Tories can’t get a deal through, the extension is secured, and an election is called – well, the SNP win in Scotland anyway. And not only that, Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson’s likely successes in England will be exactly the away result the SNP thrives upon.
The only way the SNP can really lose is if Brexit is stopped, taking away the party’s justification for demanding a snap second independence referendum.
That might go some way to explaining why neither Nicola Sturgeon nor Ian Blackford mentioned a People’s Vote in their conference speeches last week, and the SNP has used its Parliamentary amendments to prioritise a General Election instead.
First things first though: this morning all eyes are on Jacob Rees-Mogg as he outlines the Government’s preferred next steps.
A reminder that perhaps we’re all losers in this game.
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 hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel