Peter Lawwell, Celtic's chief executive, yesterday lent his full support to the proposed 12-12-18 restructuring of Scottish football and claimed his own club expected to make a bigger financial sacrifice than any other if it goes through.
Lawwell was the first high-profile figure from any club to come out in favour of the plans. Celtic stand to lose out because the additional money to be redistributed through the 42 clubs would be shaved from those at the top of the "Premier Division". The prize and television income of the team finishing top will be reduced by more than most, around £250,000-per-season.
"In order to get it done there is a change to the distribution," said Lawwell. "Some would deem that fairer, I would probably not because those who generate value should get the most. But it's a recognition – certainly from Celtic – that to get out of this gridlock we need to compromise in the central revenue to get things moving along.
"I think 12-12-18 is not perfect, we have huge challenges, but it's probably the best format available. The Sky deal is done, we're looking for a main sponsor. Where are the other revenue streams? Well, the main one is at the gates and if you have more meaningful games then you have more people turning up and that means more cash at the gate, more sponsorship interest and more TV interest."
Lawwell said the two leagues of 12, splitting into three divisions of eight after 22 games, was "not that complicated" and urged the football community to be supportive. He also stated that merging the SPL and SFL did not amount to an admission that the SPL had failed. But he admitted the new structure would do nothing to improve the chances of any team winning the title other than Celtic and Rangers.
"The predictability of the outcome of any competition kills it and that's what happened here. Celtic and Rangers have been the biggest strength because we have generated the value, but some may also argue the biggest weaknesses because it's destroyed competition. This won't change things in that respect. You need a more radical solution in order to change that."
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