SPFL: Why does league seem so worried about independent inquiry?
- Published
Murdoch MacLennan has spent three years in the background, but has come to the fore this week
Last Friday, through their non-executive director Karyn McCluskey, the SPFL issued a 700-word open letter basically saying 'there's nothing to see here' in terms of the questions being asked about its corporate governance.
On Tuesday, through its chairman Murdoch MacLennan, the body issued another open letter - 755 words - basically saying the same thing: nothing to see, please move along.
On Wednesday, a third open letter - 4,252 words now - landed, and once more the entire thing could be boiled down to the same line - nothing to see folks, please stop going on about this, nothing untoward happened.
Also on Wednesday, SPFL chief executive Neil Doncaster finally stepped out of the shadows and went public for the first time since this saga erupted. From him, through a range of different interviews, there was a reinforcement of the same mantra.
The more the SPFL says that there's nothing to see, the more the interest is piqued, the more you wonder why it is going to such lengths to close down the possibility of an independent inquiry.
It has questioned the motives of those clubs that are calling for transparency (somewhat lacking in self-awareness, it has in the next breath called for reconciliation). It has talked about "distractions, scapegoating and sideshows".
It has effectively warned all clubs that if they vote for an inquiry, they will be spending vast amounts of their own money on an investigation that is "wholly unnecessary and inappropriate". How much money? The SPFL doesn't say.
It has also gone another route in an attempt to dissuade clubs from getting on board the inquiry train. "At a time when thousands of people in our communities are dying of Covid-19, Scottish football needs to reflect and consider how this looks to the outside world," the SPFL says.
What's being said there? That because of the continuing horror that is Covid-19, nobody should asking be questions of the way the SPFL is doing its business? That because of coronavirus, the SPFL should be spared scrutiny and allowed to carry on without full accountability to all of its members?
'Why not let this all play out?'
It's worth remembering how much work Rangers, Hearts and Stranraer have to do in order to secure the inquiry they're looking for. They need 75% of clubs in each division to sign up to it.
In the Premiership, that's nine out of 12 they must win over. Already we know that Motherwell and Hamilton are against it, given they have members on the very SPFL board that are fighting so hard to bring it down.
We can also bet the house on Celtic being against it. That means all of the other nine must back the inquiry or else it's dead in the water. If this was a football match, the SPFL board would be 5-0 up with time running out and yet its constant open letters and the sudden mobilisation of Doncaster suggests concern.
MacLennan has been chairman of the SPFL for almost three years and in that time he hasn't done a single interview with a journalist. Now, suddenly, he's banging out the statements at a rate that would shame the Rangers communications department. It's curious.
Rangers may have already started to deliver their dossier of evidence to clubs, but it's quite simple. If they have compelling evidence of wrongdoing - they're alleging that clubs have been bullied and coerced by the SPFL - then they'll be doing the game a great service by revealing it.
If they don't have compelling evidence, then they're going to embarrass themselves for creating such a hubbub, including a call for Doncaster's suspension. If all they've got is a bottle of smoke, they'll be mortified in public view.
The SPFL board is convinced that nothing questionable occurred. "There is no wrongdoing here," said Les Gray, of Hamilton and a member of the SPFL's hierarchy. "We are absolutely certain of that."
Gray was speaking on Radio Scotland 10 days ago. Quite how he could be so certain is debatable given that he had no sight of Rangers' documentation and hadn't appeared to have spoken to other clubs who have privately expressed their own concerns about how the SPFL behaved in the lead-up to the vote to call the leagues.
He was certain, though. And he's far from alone. MacLennan is certain, too. With such conviction, why not step back and let this play itself out? If the endgame is to be a total exoneration of the board, a total humiliation of those casting aspersions on the board and an end of the suspension and innuendo for all time, then what's not to like?
If there's nothing to fear, and if the odds are overwhelmingly in their favour of being cleared of any of the current allegations, why are they on the rampage to close down the possibility of the inquiry? They should be encouraging it.
'Rangers must take their best shot'
MacLennan sought to answer some questions in his open letter on Wednesday. He got something of an easy ride, which was not surprising given that the person interrogating him was, er, himself. His Q&A, though lengthy, was not all that helpful.
What did Doncaster say to Dundee's John Nelms in order to turn his no vote into a cancelled vote into the decisive yes vote? We still don't know.
Why were clubs told that the only way to release funds - their own prize money - was by voting with the SPFL and closing down the season? Why weren't offers of advances against the clubs' own prize money made by the SPFL?
Why did certain clubs in the Championship say on a WhatsApp group that they were being leaned on to vote yes? Has any SPFL board member spoken to those clubs? Why did Doncaster tell Aberdeen's Dave Cormack that their vote was irrelevant?
The extraordinary general meeting is scheduled for 12 May, but the truth is that almost every day is proving extraordinary in this increasingly bitter affair.
The best thing that can happen now is for Rangers to publish whatever evidence they think they have. They need to take their best shot. A howitzer into the top corner or a miscue that hits the corner flag - the sooner we know, the better.