AT times, Scottish football can put you in mind of the climactic scene in Reservoir Dogs, where the distrust between the various gangsters involved in the movie’s diamond heist sees them arrive at a stand-off with their guns all pointing at one another.

That is exactly where the tendency to ignore the message and shoot the messenger has led us to this week upon the announcement of the SPFL’s extension of their broadcasting deal with Sky Sports. Just as in Quentin Tarantino’s masterpiece, the guns all go off, and in the end, nobody really wins.

Supposing SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster had inserted a clause ensuring Rangers TV’s Tom Miller was to be the anchor for Old Firm games, the high heid yins at Ibrox would have found fault with it.

But, equally, just because there are many other factions of the game who have an issue with Rangers and their conduct of late, doesn’t mean they aren’t making some salient points on this issue.

Could the broadcast deal have been better? Undoubtedly, yes. Both in financial terms and in the restrictions on clubs that limit streaming of matches to five games per season, for instance.

Leaving aside unsubstantiated claims from the likes of Aberdeen chairman Dave Cormack that greater access to streaming would definitely lead to a reduction in attendances, despite the opposite happening in other countries like Sweden, the timing of the whole thing appeared odd.

With the previous deal with Sky not ending until 2025, many will be rightfully asking why now was the juncture to lock the league into another contract until 2029. And why, despite Doncaster’s assurances that a ‘proper process’ had taken place, the rights were not formally taken to market.

At the very least, surely seeing what other players such as Viaplay – who now own Premier Sports – and BT Sport were willing to put on the table may have squeezed a few extra quid out of Sky, and ensured that the SPFL were getting the true market value of the product.

When putting this question to Doncaster in a sit-down earlier this week, the answer that came back essentially equated to a nudge, a wink, and a ruffling of the hair at the naivety of it all.

“Oh, everyone had a chance, so don’t be misled,” Doncaster said, barely resisting the urge to add ‘Dear boy’ to the start of his answer.

“Everyone had a chance to come forward, it was clearly no secret that we were out in the market.

“We were talking to the key players in the market, and ultimately the deal that has come forward is the deal that has been endorsed by clubs.

“There has been a proper process. We sat round this table with the cinch Premiership clubs, all 12 sat here and talked about the process that had been gone through in terms of market testing and talking to the various people who might be interested in Scottish football.

“So, it’s a complete fallacy to suggest there has been no process.”

Doncaster is clever with his wording. There is no doubt whatsoever that the SPFL have had discussions behind the scenes with the various players in the market. But a formal process, these back channel chats do not make.

The meeting of the Premiership clubs Doncaster refers to, it has been confirmed by Rangers commercial director James Bisgrove, was indeed attended by all 12 members. But this is where the agreed upon version of events diverges.

“Stewart (Robertson) and I were in the SPFL Premiership clubs meeting and asked how can we, as a group of clubs, as a league, be sure that this is the best value in the market when we haven’t engaged with other players in that market?” Bisgrove said.

“The information and intelligence that we got suggests that very recently other big rights that were in the market had created competitive tension.

“You’ve got BT Sport and their joint venture with Discovery, you’ve got Viaplay and NENT, you’ve got DAZN. And there are others further afield, the likes of Amazon.

“We’ve said all along we think Sky are a great partner, they’re a brilliant partner for Scottish football but to give everyone assurance that the value is as high as it possibly can be, you’ve got to take this to the market.

“There’s a reason why TEAM Marketing that run the UEFA Champions League, Europa League tenders, go to the market every time. They run a competitive process, it’s the reason why the Premier League do that.”

The reason that the SPFL didn’t? Put simply, the vast majority of clubs preferred the guaranteed money in the hand from Sky now rather than gambling on what might be in the bush in a year or so.

Perhaps the hangover from the disastrous Setanta deal is still lingering in boardrooms up and down the country, and why getting the Sky deal secured was deemed so important that the goalposts had to be shifted to force it through, with the amendment of the resolution that previously required unanimous support rendering Rangers’ resistance as futile.

So, the deal is done, and no amount of wailing or gnashing of teeth will change it. The challenge now for clubs is to prove that their comfort in accepting the terms on offer from Sky doesn’t translate into complacency.

There has to be a clear vision going forward to improve the coverage of Scottish football, and also in marketing the SPFL properly as a brand so that - when 2029 does eventually roll around - there is a realistic opportunity to achieve the stated goal of attracting £50m a year in broadcasting revenue.

That was the target set out in the independent review conducted by Deloitte into Scottish football, which also included a desire to ‘improve the image, brand and profile of the SPFL’ and ‘move the league away from a largely administrative function to a more robust and dynamic commercial structure.’

It may be apportioning too much credit to the SPFL and the clubs to suggest that this deal was accepted to provide the short-term security needed to put the spade work into achieving those long-term goals, but if that is the result, then it can only be a good thing.

Surely that is something we can all agree on. Right?