THE perennial question of the Old Firm's desire to explore more fertile footballing territory furth of Scotland was addressed again yesterday, albeit from two different platforms.
While Charles Green, the Rangers chief executive, was in London chasing investors ahead of the club's planned flotation on the AIM market, his Celtic counterpart, Peter Lawwell, was speaking at the club's annual meeting in Glasgow.
Both are keenly watching a UEFA experiment in which 16 women's teams in Belgium and the Netherlands will be allowed to form a cross-border league in a three-year trial.
Celtic want to be part of any move towards the creation of European regional leagues for larger clubs operating in smaller markets.
Rangers have similar aspirations, but yesterday it was the old chestnut of playing in the English Premier League that was moving Green.
"Restructuring [of the Scottish league] will revisit the taboo," Green said. "A bit like, 'Don't talk about the war to the Germans.' 'Don't mention Rangers and Celtic leaving Scotland.'
"I think that taboo is going to be lifted . . . Scottish football, without Rangers and Celtic, might actually become more competitive for the remaining clubs rather than having these two monsters sat above them.
"If Rangers were in the Premier League, only Manchester United would be bigger," Green said. "Arsenal haven't got more fans than Rangers; our fan base is so big.
"I don't believe the Premier League are hostile towards it because I think it's a generalisation. United are not hostile to Rangers joining."
Despite a Manchester United spokesman stating the contrary, Green stuck to his argument.
"Why would Man United want to play Southampton? Why, when they could play Rangers? Sixty percent of the Premier League don't want Rangers. Of course they don't want Rangers. It threatens their existence . . . but if you asked the big clubs, 'Would you like Rangers . . . ?"
Green also believes big clubs around the world would be keen to play Rangers. In the presentation to potential investors, Green features a quote from the Barcelona president Sandro Rosell, highlighting the virtue of playing European rivals on weekends. "What will change football over five to 10 years is this insatiable demand for the big clubs to play each other," Green said.
"And this is not the insatiable demand from the west Midlands or from north London. This is the demand from the Middle East, Asia, the Far East."
Talks have already began between UEFA and the European Club Association (ECA) about pan-European leagues becoming a reality and, although discussions are still in their infancy, it is something Celtic would be keen to be involved in.
"It's very early days but what UEFA are beginning to realise is that there's a huge chasm, a polarisation between the top leagues and the smaller leagues in Europe," said Lawwell.
"That is down to size of population and size of reach. Media rights, over the last 10 years, have really escalated beyond anyone's forecast to levels within these [clubs] that makes it very difficult for anyone else to compete. One solution is that smaller nations could form regional leagues that would allow them to have bigger markets and therefore bigger media rights to close the gap slightly.
"Playing in Scotland, a country of five million people and the media values that attracts, is restrictive, not just to Celtic but any Scottish club.
"Reconstruction in Scotland might make the game better but it won't transform it. The Sky deal is now set for five years so your broadcasting revenue is fixed. You can look at a new title sponsor but again it would be stretching the imagination to think that would transform the game. We are where we are with the revenues in Scotland. It needs something different to take us forward.
"There's a pilot programme just now with the Dutch and Belgian ladies associations who have merged . . . It is very early but it's a concept. It's a minor breakthrough that UEFA are opening up their minds."
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