All by myself, dont wanna be, all by myself
I find we as a group spend an excessive amount of time explaining how exactly the PLC pulled the wool over our eyes on several issues, like Res12 and the death of Rangers, but we rarely seem to touch upon the big question of why they reached the decisions the did at the time.
All that follows is mere speculation of course, but understanding the rationale behind these choices will help us possibly forgive some of them and maybe anticipate future decisions based on this past behavior.
The last decade has shown one thing very clearly, we are the green half of a partnership, not a rivalry.
You see a rival would have no hesitation in helping the competitions demise with the aim of stealing their customers, a bigger piece of the market share. Some rivals would even help foster the opportunity to grab a bigger slice of the pie at their rivals expense. Rivals are there to be crushed, before they crush you.
They certainly aren’t your friend.
A partnership though is much different. There may well be a dominant partner but either party never enacts harm on the other, quite the opposite. They help each other out and if one should need assistance the other has their back.
Glasgow Celtic were faced with numerous opportunities to kill off their world famous ‘rivalry’ known as the Old Firm and as one half of the duet had more than enough reason to speak up when it was in trouble, dire straits, then dead.
Our club of choice ignored their death, pretended it never happened while dropping hints it never (49 quid and dropping ‘The’ infront of their name etc) then downsized to help them to a title, whilst never objecting to the use of 55 which totally affects us.
We held out the hand and helped them out of that pit they had dug for themselves.
Being far from a legal mind certain questions spring to mind regarding what a PLC may or may not do.
For instance, announcing the Old Firm was over to the world would clearly have affected the share price negatively, yet as we now know the option to continue/revive the partnership existed.
When faced with these two options, both legal, one much more profitable than the other (presumably), were the board legally obliged to follow the money of the Old Firm?
Where their hands were tied, required to ignore sporting integrity for the bottom line?
I get the feeling if that was true they would have announced it and hidden behind it.
Forgetting legal requirements for a while, the board clearly took a the view this partnership was in the companies best interest but is this necessarily true?
Could we have went alone, could we thrive out with the dreaded Old Firm?
We may never find out, the famous ‘its just cost us ten million a year’ statement from Peter post liquidation showing their mindset, profit first always.
I suspect many would hark back to the Ronny D years and the drop in sales, the sold out 49 pieces of silver cup game that sold out, and say aye we need them, sorry fact or not.
Looking at the football landscape there’s very few one horse races out there, Cluj being the first that springs to mind,,a club that has cracked onto a successful European qualifying strategy, but also has a much larger native player pool to draw from. Processions to title after title aren’t that interesting sometimes even for the winning teams support.
Our certain two horse race is so successful it’s world renowned, and does keep interest and sales high enough.
Was that a strong enough reason for this PLC to keep the show on the road?
They clearly thought so.
In private I suspect Peter would probably admit to fearing season ticket sales of thirty thousand to be the most important mitigating factor for ignoring their demise, but then this board have never been visionary, would probably see going it alone is a crying shame and lost income opportunity.
I personally would have embarked on a youth first policy supplemented by the finest local experience we could buy, always playing in the traditional Glasgow Celtic way.
A lower entry point for season ticket sales especially for young ones, alongside local groups using the Park as a community hub, and a partnership with a decent food outlet to revamp the day out experience off the top of my head.
But overall an emphasis on becoming a club of the people again, with mostly/only locals aiming to conquer Europe with dazzling football for the second time.
Eventually a new rival would emerge to replace that which was lost, the Dons or Jambo’s more than likely.
We weren’t born the green half of the Old Firm and some at least would opt not to be if given the choice,,yes there would be some drift but an exciting path could retain a lot of those I believe.
To help cement the new vision and get the fans fully involved in the project, the support should have been given the honest facts from day one and probably would have sympathized with the club for the huge dilemma, maybe going the extra mile to show their solidarity.
Peter could have done a roadshow series explaining we are not only ten million down but a one horse race won’t work after a two horse one, plead clemency due to being between a rock and a hard place, and maybe just maybe came away with a large degree of sympathy.
A consensus could have been agreed, such as okay we all accept them back into the top flight under certain conditions such as no claiming previous titles and operating a solid business plan with public accounts that must be signed off.
If the will was there to accommodate them again, something could have been cobbled together, but it would have needed consensus plus strong leadership.
We got neither and were left to our own excitement talking jelly and ice cream only to find out Peter rushed down to London to sign a four Old Firm games per year contract, the perfect shield to hide behind he probably thought.
The board shat the bed and said we need them, gotta have them, and by helping the resuscitation stuck an engagement ring on that clubs finger.
Alone was just never an option for them, sporting integrity and trust be damned.
If the majority of the fanbase honestly believe and accept that Glasgow Celtic needs its rival and world famous rivalry, then our board have been proven correct in their assumptions and some of us need to accept that facts of why exactly events took place like they did, why we never said they died out loud.
If the board really were just delivering what the people wanted, at the known price of sporting integrity, maybe some of the wrath they receive is unwarranted?
Did the board in reality save Celtic from mediocrity and/or the slow ugly demise of a one horse league by reviving them?
Now years have passed and fans in the main have accepted the rivalry again, do the PLCs actions at the time make more sense?
Blog Poll – a simple yes or no please.
Could Glasgow Celtic thrive without Rangers?
Mahe = Yes.