This weekend's top-of-the-table clash between Celtic and Aberdeen was reminiscent of a contest between the two sides around this time in the calendar nine years ago.

The Dons, having won their first six games of the Premiership season, hosted Ronny Deila's reigning champions at Pittodrie. Enticed by such an occasion, this reporter left a couple of hours earlier than required to attend Partick Thistle v Dundee, a game I was covering for my previous employer, to settle into a pub on Great Western Road and watch the action. I can still feel the buzz of excitement when Paul Quinn knocked in a late winner for the hosts. Appointment viewing had lived up to expectation and for a brief period Scottish football was awash with talk of a non-Glasgow club potentially putting in a sustained title race.

It's not hard to spot the parallels between that contest and what occurred this weekend. Though Jimmy Thelin's side may have lost their 100 per cent record, they remain neck and neck with Celtic after fighting back from two goals down to take a point. But there was one crucial difference: this time it wasn't on television.

Sky, somewhat understandably, had failed to envision this match meaning quite so much when they initially set out their early-season schedule, and having used up two of their five trips to Celtic Park already, they were unwilling to burn another in mid-October. However, there was an alternative. The SPFL reached a deal with Premier Sports in the summer which would allow an additional 20 live games this season. This could provide greater flexibility and see more games shown live that would interest supporters other than whomever Celtic or Rangers were playing away from home that week.

Or so we thought. Celtic decided instead to opt out of the deal. No games from Parkhead will be shown by the broadcaster for the rest of the 2024/25 campaign, and it meant nobody except those inside the ground or international subscribers to each club's TV service were able to watch the game live.

It would be easy to point the finger at Celtic, but in this instance I have a fair degree of understanding with their decision. They didn't believe the money on offer was worth inconveniencing their fans, who had only experienced one Saturday 3pm kick-off at home so far in this campaign prior to the weekend's match.

It does, however, raise the question: what exactly does Scottish football want from its TV deal?

There was outrage last season when Dutch football agreed a deal that was around four times what the SPFL brings in per annum. It was an unfair comparison for many reasons. Firstly, Scotland doesn't have its own national broadcaster. Secondly, the Netherlands is a country three times the size with a more prestigious product. And lastly, the sheer number of games which are shown live on television would likely lead to equal fury if it were introduced here.

In order to get more money, assuming someone is willing to pay for matches that don't involve Celtic or Rangers playing either a) each other or b) somebody else away from home, we'd have to put up for sale many more matches than we currently are. And our clubs don't want to do this.
They're afraid it'll affect the number of people who come through the gates. Every year it is reported that Scotland has the highest per-capita attendance rate of any league in Europe, and they don't want that to change. Going to the football is very much part of the culture in Scotland, and it would be foolish to imagine this would change overnight, regardless of how many games are available on TV, but it is something which could occur over time. That's the fear our clubs have, anyway. They don't want TV cameras and patches of empty seats. They want the latter full and if that means the former isn't allowed in, so be it.

And do fans really want it as well? They want it any time a match like Celtic v Aberdeen, or some of the Edinburgh derbies from recent campaigns, aren't broadcast live. But they don't want it if it means they and their brethren are inconvenienced by one of their own games getting moved to a Saturday lunchtime or Saturday evening or, worst of all, Sunday lunchtime to accommodate them in the TV schedule. Even if we did do away with the 3pm blackout, a TV company wanting in on this Scottish-football-for-all deal would still want to stagger games throughout the day to ensure there are as many eyes on the product as possible.

It’s a complicated situation, more so than the common rhetoric around Scottish football television coverage would have you believe. But it’s also hard to imagine any other top league in Europe having a first-versus-second clash in mid-October and not broadcasting it live.

It feels like a missed opportunity to highlight, not just to people outwith Scotland, but the naysayers within our own borders, that football here isn’t just about two teams, as Aberdeen fought back from 2-0 down to earn a point in what was a hugely entertaining encounter full of drama. Like the Paul Quinn game from 2015, this should have been appointment viewing. Instead, unless you were one of the 60,000 inside the ground, your relationship to the match was probably from the act of periodically checking the score on a goals app as you watched your own team make a substitution.

The Premier Sports deal was supposed to reduce instances such as these, but in order for it to be voted through, the clubs had to be given the option of withdrawing if they didn’t like it. And thus, we’re back in another situation where Scottish football can’t agree on how best to show itself.