Killie Chairman Lambasts Old Firm

[Charlie-Brown]

Another scathing attack on the Old Firm and a 10 team SPL

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/kilmarnock/2011/02/01/old-firm-offer-nothing-when-it-comes-to-scottish-football-reform-they-just-want-to-take-the-profits-86908-22890969/

 

Killie chief: Old Firm offer nothing when it comes to Scottish football reform, they just want to take the profits

Feb 1 2011 By Gavin Berry

 

KILMARNOCK chairman Michael Johnston has blasted the Old Firm and claims they offer nothing when it comes to helping Scottish football - because they're only interested in themselves.

 

The raging Rugby Park supremo lashed out at the Glasgow giants as he spoke at an official fans' meeting over proposals for a new 10-team top flight, which SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster also attended.

 

Johnston is unhappy at the split of revenue generated from the league being heavily weighted towards Rangers and Celtic and said the big two aren't leading from the front in our game.

 

He said: "If you're looking for leadership and vision from your two biggest clubs - regularly among the top 20 earners in Europe - then you aren't going to get it. I've been to these meetings and the Old Firm say nothing.

 

"They have not offered anything into this process to help the clubs lower down in Scottish football. It's the mid-table clubs who are being forced to take the risks and make all the sacrifices.

 

"We've been asked to take the risk that instead of a one-in-12 chance of relegation, we're going to be three out of effectively eight teams because you take Rangers and Celtic out of the equation.

 

"The Old Firm won't give up any of the finance they get at the moment in the new visionary structure for Scottish football.

 

"And they also won't give up their voting rights in matters that are crucial - a 9-1 majority would be required for changes in the 10-team top tier.

 

"Doncaster is a nice guy but he's a solicitor and it is evident that he has been given a brief to try and present and sell to everyone.

 

"There are a lot of holes in the argument and it doesn't float. We're getting a lot of statistics that don't stand up to scrutiny.

 

"One that stood out was this idea that there's some sort of fairness in the way the finances are distributed.

 

"Our league must be one of the worst in terms of being disproportionate. Most of the revenue goes to the Old Firm and that's a key point in this debate.

 

"It hasn't been addressed by the strategic review group and it has been totally batted aside in this report that has been put in front of the clubs. " Johnston - who backed the Record's bid for a 14-team league - is worried about the implications of a 10-team format for non-Old Firm clubs.

 

He said: "Three teams out of eight would be locked in a relegation battle all season. Everyone realises how fraught that would become and how negative the tactics would be.

 

"All of the clubs could be in that mix at some point during the season.

 

Stability "You could have your biggest clubs constantly locked in a relegation battle.

 

"It also means there's no financial stability. You'd have the two big clubs and the other eight would have to plan financially on a year-to-year basis. The reason for that is you could never be sure it wasn't your turn to be eighth, ninth or 10th in the league and get sucked into a relegation battle.

 

"You wouldn't be able to offer players contracts of more than 12 months without having lots of provisions written into them about wages going down.

 

"Negotiations with players are hard enough at the moment. But trying to negotiate a contract where you have the flexibility to terminate it at the end of each season would be a nightmare.

 

"Yet having a player on a longer contract is absolutely crucial if you have any chance of getting a transfer fee.

 

"It usually takes two or three years if someone is going to come through and prove themselves to be valuable.

 

"And if a player goes into their last year of a deal when someone starts to take notice of them their value reduces.

 

"The vast majority of fans and even managers are in favour of a bigger league. There are all sorts of arguments that could be put forward in favour of that but they're batted aside by Neil."

[jamboruss]

He sounds like he's surprised and that collusion and greed from the ugly sisters is a new thing - where has he been, Peebles?

[Victorian]

superb. about time someone from within the game spoke out like this.

 

the fact that doncaster had to sit and listen to it is even better.

 

hopefully - finally - this will act as a catalyst to empower others to follow suit.

[kingantti1874]

spot on... sounds like at least killie and caley will vote against so no 10 team league... i also doubt vlad would pander to the OF...

[Don Juan]

I never used to like him much, but have to take my hat off to him for being one of the few chairmen in the league to actually stand up and say the truth.

[The Treasurer]

I never used to like him much, but have to take my hat off to him for being one of the few chairmen in the league to actually stand up and say the truth.

 

It's taken him long enough.

I just hope he can't be "bought" like it would appear Thomson at Utd has been.

Looks like at this time only us, Killie and ICT have the balls to stand up and be counted.

[Gods a Jambo]

Brilliant article and shows up those on here who are happy for a ten team league. This comes from a Chairman who has access to all the spiel being put forward and still concludes its total shite and only made to benefit the old firm.

[Cut The Crap]

It's taken him long enough.

I just hope he can't be "bought" like it would appear Thomson at Utd has been.

Looks like at this time only us, Killie and ICT have the balls to stand up and be counted.

 

The last we heard from Romanov was that he was undecided but hinted that he was happy to be bought.

 

Romanov explained afterwards that he would neither reject the ten-team plan out of hand nor support a 14-team league unequivocally. Instead, he argued that the restoration of some kind of reserve or youth-team league was essential, as was the redistribution of income away from Rangers and Celtic.

 

"First, it is obligatory that the tournament of reserve teams is resumed," he said. "Without such reserves competition, the youths will have no chances to get into the main teams. Secondly, the distribution of the league's profits should be decided democratically," he continued.

[ernie winchester]

Well said Mr Johnstone!

[Nookie Bear]

It sounds like he has listened - well said that man!

[CBjambo]

Excellent stuff from the Killie chairman.

 

I SEROIOUSLY hope Vlad sides with MJ over this and the rest of the '10' spl clubs outside the OF tell Doncaster to ram it.

 

Saying it for years the OF are ruining Scottish Football and the sfa/spl are spineless when it comes to their dealings with them... There is not one argument 'for' a ten team top tier, the maths do not work and nobody seems to want it... so why are we being forced into this?!

 

Grow some balls chairmen of the '10' spl clubs... and also get rid of the 11/1 vote!

[hmfc_liam06]

Does anyone have a copy of how the money is distributed? Im sure someone posted it on a previous thread.

[Skivingatwork]

Total disgrace how the money are voting rights are currently distributed.

 

Stand up Non OF chairman and be counted - your fans will back you!

[Charlie-Brown]

How can the voting rights automatically go from requiring an 11-1 majority down to needing a 9-1 majority meaning the OF can block whatever they don't like?

[Gibbo]

The last we heard from Romanov was that he was undecided but hinted that he was happy to be bought.

 

I think that it's clear that VR has a price, but that it's one that the OF are unlikely to be willing to pay. He doesn't seem to be too bothered about the size of the league, but wants a more even split of the revenue. Can't see the OF agreeing to that.

[The Treasurer]

The last we heard from Romanov was that he was undecided but hinted that he was happy to be bought.

 

 

 

I think that making a decision only if his terms are met can hardly be called being "bought"

Mr Romanov indicated that he would back a format that included the restoration of the reserve league and a fairer distribution of the monies generated by the league.

If they don't meet his requirements then he won't vote with them

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

What a guy! You farkin tell them Johnston!

 

Vlad MUST back this!

[Boomstick]

Good stuff from MJ.

 

It's a shame he's a prick who mistreated JJ & KK.

 

But I'll grudgingly nod a bit of respect his way.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

Good stuff from MJ.

 

It's a shame he's a prick who mistreated JJ & KK.

 

But I'll grudgingly nod a bit of respect his way.

 

Similar... But like yourself, I will be big enough to still admit that I agree with the guy when he talks sense!

 

Hope this spurs a few more chairmen and owners on to redouble their efforts against this unpopular plan.

[fc1874]

I know it won't happen, but it would be very enlightening if the vote was 10 to 2 against a ten team league. It would make those scum bags stick out like a sore thumb (or words to that effect). At the moment they are bullying others into doing their dirty work and are not being forced into coming clean.

[shaun.lawson]

 

"Doncaster is a nice guy but he's a solicitor and it is evident that he has been given a brief to try and present and sell to everyone.

 

 

Doncaster was Norwich CEO in his previous life. The above is, I'm afraid, entirely spot on.

[colinmaroon]

He sounds like he's surprised and that collusion and greed from the ugly sisters is a new thing - where has he been, Peebles?

 

 

 

 

Sorry mate! That's a poor reaction!

 

We all know that's the truth (well apart from those on JKB who have been denying it for years) but what is changing is that those who run the clubs are becoming more open and vocal about the shambles that is Scottish Football! And that is a good thing!

 

And also, the media are more open to printing it! (Perhaps because Sir David, the robber baron, is losing some of his influence)?

 

The 10 team will entrench the already strong position of the Uglies and, for that reason alone, I would back a 14 team league and to hell with all the controversy about splits etc.

[Monty Carlo]

Great quotes in that article. Can't agree with him on a 14 team league though. Splitting after 28 games and having the possibility (albeit remote) of the 8th place team finishing the season with 36 more points than the 7th placed is daft.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

Great quotes in that article. Can't agree with him on a 14 team league though. Splitting after 28 games and having the possibility (albeit remote) of the 8th place team finishing the season with 36 more points than the 7th placed is daft.

 

Maybe... I'd take that over increased OF revenue in comparison to the rest of us and increased OF voting power though.

[Monty Carlo]

Maybe... I'd take that over increased OF revenue in comparison to the rest of us and increased OF voting power though.

 

 

Sure. It's a bit of a hole in the Killie chairman's argument though - splitting after 26 games and having the bottom 7 teams fight it out amongst themselves for 2 relegation spaces could be seen as putting them at more risk of relegation.

[Guest Bilel Mohsni]

Sure. It's a bit of a hole in the Killie chairman's argument though - splitting after 28 games and having the bottom 7 teams fight it out amongst themselves for 2 relegation spaces could be seen as putting them at more risk of relegation.

 

That is true... if you think about it in terms of the effect of relegation from 10 team SPL into 12 team SPL2 as well, then Killie would not take as big a hit as they would from 14 team SPL into SFL1.

 

Presume he has done his sums though and feels that his club are safer in a split 14 set-up... Either that or he genuinely wants to do what is best for the whole of Scottish Football and not just his club......... Nah!

[Boof]

I'm broadly in agreement, hoiwever the smallest of small points is that

 

KILMARNOCK chairman Michael Johnston said

"We've been asked to take the risk that instead of a one-in-12 chance of relegation, we're going to be three out of effectively eight teams because you take Rangers and Celtic out of the equation.

 

 

...if you take the OF out of the equation in the second scenario you must do likewise for the first so it's a 1 in 10 chance.

 

Unless he's talking about a 14-team league minus the OF for relegation-scrapping purposes...but I don't think so.

[Monty Carlo]

I'm broadly in agreement, hoiwever the smallest of small points is that

 

 

 

...if you take the OF out of the equation in the second scenario you must do likewise for the first so it's a 1 in 10 chance.

 

Unless he's talking about a 14-team league minus the OF for relegation-scrapping purposes...but I don't think so.

 

 

His reasoning doesn't make much sense. Two from ten dropping into an SPL2 is surely better for them than two from seven (albeit with the points they accumulated up to the split) dropping into an independently financed SFL.

[kingantti1874]

both 10 and 14 are piss poor garbage ideas... 12 is better than either despite the fixture problems.... its should stay as it is unless its 16 or 18.. hopefully vlad will torpedo the ****s

[2NaFish]

good lambasting.

[Francis Albert]

I'm broadly in agreement, hoiwever the smallest of small points is that

 

 

 

...if you take the OF out of the equation in the second scenario you must do likewise for the first so it's a 1 in 10 chance.

 

Unless he's talking about a 14-team league minus the OF for relegation-scrapping purposes...but I don't think so.

 

Fair but a bit nit-picking.

 

In practice currently 1 out of 10. In new proposal potentially 3 out of 8. He is right to argue that that is a recipe for negative, risk-averse, relegation-avoidance strategy for all but the OF clubs, making it more difficult for them to sign players on long term deals or bring through youngsters. It's hard to think of a better way of cementing OF dominance. Completely fail to understand why ANY club outside the OF supports this.

 

Confirms too that under the proposals the current top 2 (almost always the OF now, even more so with these proposals) retain their current revenue share while the rest is spread even more thinly. Again, why on earth are non-OF clubs even willing to consider this?

[Charlie-Brown]

Fair but a bit nit-picking.

 

In practice currently 1 out of 10. In new proposal potentially 3 out of 8. He is right to argue that that is a recipe for negative, risk-averse, relegation-avoidance strategy for all but the OF clubs, making it more difficult for them to sign players on long term deals or bring through youngsters. It's hard to think of a better way of cementing OF dominance. Completely fail to understand why ANY club outside the OF supports this.

 

Confirms too that under the proposals the current top 2 (almost always the OF now, even more so with these proposals) retain their current revenue share while the rest is spread even more thinly. Again, why on earth are non-OF clubs even willing to consider this?

 

I think it's a Hobson's choice for many of the SPL clubs - either vote FOR the changes and take their chance under the new set up OR as has been hinted SKY will pull the plug on the current level of TV finance they offer the SPL and clubs will be looking at an immediate ?1M or so each being wiped from their turnover...... it's a bollock's choice with serious ramifications for worsening Scottish football but sadly I think the majority of SPL clubs will vote for it, we can only hope there is enough dissenting clubs to prevent it.

[Francis Albert]

I think it's a Hobson's choice for many of the SPL clubs - either vote FOR the changes and take their chance under the new set up OR as has been hinted SKY will pull the plug on the current level of TV finance they offer the SPL and clubs will be looking at an immediate ?1M or so each being wiped from their turnover...... it's a bollock's choice with serious ramifications for worsening Scottish football but sadly I think the majority of SPL clubs will vote for it, we can only hope there is enough dissenting clubs to prevent it.

 

 

Why would the proposed 10 club set up compared to the the current 12 club set up be such a make or break issue for Sky (or ESPN)? The only obvious plus are the play-offs but they're hardly going to be global money-spinners for anyone.

[Charlie-Brown]

Why would the proposed 10 club set up compared to the the current 12 club set up be such a make or break issue for Sky (or ESPN)? The only obvious plus are the play-offs but they're hardly going to be global money-spinners for anyone.

 

As far as i can see (and why I think Hibs & Aberdeen in particular favour it) TEN teams with no split means everybody plays everybody else a guaranteed 4 times hence they & SKY are (almost) guaranteed 4 x Rangers, Celtic, Aberdeen, Hibs, Hearts, Dundee Utd all versus each other which cannot be guaranteed under a 12 or 14 teams with a split, some teams might finish on the opposite sides of the split as looks likely to happen this season.

[portobellojambo1]

The last we heard from Romanov was that he was undecided but hinted that he was happy to be bought.

 

 

 

I would hardly class Romanov's statement as indicating he is willing to be bought. What he has effectively said to the OF is something he knows they'll never agree to, because it is impolite for an owner to simply tell someone to feck off. He has laid stipulations on the table that he knows the OF will never agree to. If they do, it is they who have then been bought, not Romanov.

 

Mind you I would have preferred if he had just said "Feck you bar stewards, NO DEAL".

[Paolo]

He is right but fcuk him. He is years too late.

 

Vlad saw through the Old Firm from day one but did anyone back him? No. They buried their heads or targeted him instead as did some of our own, probably including some who are praising Killie too.

[Francis Albert]

As far as i can see (and why I think Hibs & Aberdeen in particular favour it) TEN teams with no split means everybody plays everybody else a guaranteed 4 times hence they & SKY are (almost) guaranteed 4 x Rangers, Celtic, Aberdeen, Hibs, Hearts, Dundee Utd all versus each other which cannot be guaranteed under a 12 or 14 teams with a split, some teams might finish on the opposite sides of the split as looks likely to happen this season.

 

 

With 3 out of 8 at risk of relegation each season there is no guarantee that in any given season some of the teams you mention will have ANY games against the OF and the others, or that there will be any Edinburgh derbies.

[Dave Spacey]

Does anyone have a copy of how the money is distributed? Im sure someone posted it on a previous thread.

 

Don't know the exact sums of money, but from a previous article the breakdown is this

 

1st place X amount of money

2nd place ?325,000 less than 1st.

3rd place ?1 million less than 2nd.

[Charlie-Brown]

With 3 out of 8 at risk of relegation each season there is no guarantee that in any given season some of the teams you mention will have ANY games against the OF and the others, or that there will be any Edinburgh derbies.

 

I know that, you know that but the bean counters don't think about the footballing consequences they just look at how can we ensure a maximum amount of televised games between the 6 biggest clubs and in particular against the Old Firm each season.

 

Put it this way Iam 100% confident if the 10 team league ends up pushing some of bigger clubs into the lower division as already happened with the 10 team format in it's previous incarnations then it won't be long until the SPL is again expanded back up to 12 or 14 to provide some extra insurance against being relegated as happened each time we had 10 before.

[Footballfirst]

Don't know the exact sums of money, but from a previous article the breakdown is this

 

1st place X amount of money

2nd place ?325,000 less than 1st.

3rd place ?1 million less than 2nd.

SPL - 12 team Total?16,000,000

1 - 4%+13.00%=17.00% - ?2,720,000

2 - 4%+11.00%=15.00% - ?2,400,000

3 - 4%+5.50%=9.50% - ?1,520,000

4 - 4%+4.50%=8.50% - ?1,360,000

5 - 4%+4.00%=8.00% - ?1,280,000

6 - 4%+3.50%=7.50% - ?1,200,000

7 - 4%+3.00%=7.00% - ?1,120,000

8 - 4%+2.50%=6.50% - ?1,040,000

9 - 4%+2.00%=6.00% - ?960,000

10 - 4%+1.50%=5.50% - ?880,000

11 - 4%+1.00%=5.00% - ?800,000

12 - 4%+0.50%=4.50% -?720,000

[magicTs]

Plenty tip-toeing around it but its simple really from a Hearts point of view. Romanov has a fantastic opportunity to carry favor with a huge % of the supporters in Scotland and Hearts being the leading club amongst the apparent dissenters should be making a stance and indeed bringing the likes of Killie and ICT even more onside. He has mumped and moaned enough about how he perceives Rantic to be ruining Scottish football, well he will rarely get a better opportunity to stop them from getting their own way. Everything should be done to stop the ludicrous 10 team league setup and this is the time for Romanov to put his stamp on things if he cares so passionately about the game in this country. I'll support him big time if he has the cojones but so far that aint at all clear in this matter.

 

 

[DETTY29]

One thing he is spot on about is the fear factor of relegation.

 

We are going from 12 to 10, in one fell swoop meaning that 25%, or even 30% if they introduce a play off will definitely be involved in a direct relegation battle.

 

Every year thereafter teams 8 through to 10 could get relegated - 33% of the league.

 

It's not inconceivable that we could er, win the league this year then be a couple of injuries (Colin Cameron / Neil McCann) from being right in the sh!tt3r 12 months later.

 

I still have no idea what the correct solution is but I steadfastly stand behind my view that the continuation of the split is by far the least of our worries.

[kennyblack'sshot]

The Old Firm's silence throughout the entire reconstruction 'discussion' has been deafening. Johnston is totally right - they couldn't care less about Scottish football yet we still pander to their every wish.

[Stupid Sexy Flanders]

It's about time the whole rest of the SPL/SFL, all 40 clubs, stood up to the OF and said "You need us much more than we need you, so here's what going to happen. And if you don't like it, you can feck off and join any league that'll take you, or just play each other 38 times a year."

[blairdin]

Plenty tip-toeing around it but its simple really from a Hearts point of view. Romanov has a fantastic opportunity to carry favor with a huge % of the supporters in Scotland and Hearts being the leading club amongst the apparent dissenters should be making a stance and indeed bringing the likes of Killie and ICT even more onside. He has mumped and moaned enough about how he perceives Rantic to be ruining Scottish football, well he will rarely get a better opportunity to stop them from getting their own way. Everything should be done to stop the ludicrous 10 team league setup and this is the time for Romanov to put his stamp on things if he cares so passionately about the game in this country. I'll support him big time if he has the cojones but so far that aint at all clear in this matter.

 

To be fair to mad Vlad, he's made it clear what he wants. He's looking for a fairer distribution of wealth through the SPL and the re-introduction of a reserve league. Mad Vlad has made it clear he aspires to see Hearts have the best youth policy in Scotland, bringing young players through the Academy to the first team. A better distribution of wealth gives Hearts the means to achieve it and the reintroduction of a reserve league (or reserve teams in lower divisions) provides a platform for young players too old for the U19s/U21s but still not ready for the first team to develop. If he has to compromise on league size to get this, I think he might. It's unlikely to happen though, old firm turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

 

That's not to say he, along with us and many others throughout Scottish football, will agree with most if not all of what Michael Johnson is saying here. But mad Vald, like Michael Johnson, will vote for the change that best suits his club. It's perfectly reasonable for Hearts, Killie and ICT to stand together to vote this 10 team bollocks down, but for their own subtle reasons.

[kennyblack'sshot]

Plenty tip-toeing around it but its simple really from a Hearts point of view. Romanov has a fantastic opportunity to carry favor with a huge % of the supporters in Scotland and Hearts being the leading club amongst the apparent dissenters should be making a stance and indeed bringing the likes of Killie and ICT even more onside. He has mumped and moaned enough about how he perceives Rantic to be ruining Scottish football, well he will rarely get a better opportunity to stop them from getting their own way. Everything should be done to stop the ludicrous 10 team league setup and this is the time for Romanov to put his stamp on things if he cares so passionately about the game in this country. I'll support him big time if he has the cojones but so far that aint at all clear in this matter.

 

He did take a lead and spoke out a few years ago - way before anyone else. He got fined ?40,000 or so for his trouble. Time for other to also step up to the plate.

[Charlie-Brown]

the problem hearts, inverness and killie face is lack of support from the other clubs, they were the only 3 to vote to investigate a 14 team league yet st mirren and motherwell and dundee utd who'd spoken out against the ten and wanted a bigger league bottled it and kept their heads down when it came to the crunch. Hearts, killie and inverness could scupper the ten team proposal then suffer the wrath of the other 9 clubs if that means a much reduced tv deal for everybody if sky don't get their wish and offer way less than they do now. Rangers and Celtic are a tape worm but they've got most of the other clubs in their pockets sadly.

[Munch]

Another scathing attack on the Old Firm and a 10 team SPL

 

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/football/spl/kilmarnock/2011/02/01/old-firm-offer-nothing-when-it-comes-to-scottish-football-reform-they-just-want-to-take-the-profits-86908-22890969/

 

Killie chief: Old Firm offer nothing when it comes to Scottish football reform, they just want to take the profits

Feb 1 2011 By Gavin Berry

 

KILMARNOCK chairman Michael Johnston has blasted the Old Firm and claims they offer nothing when it comes to helping Scottish football - because they're only interested in themselves.

 

The raging Rugby Park supremo lashed out at the Glasgow giants as he spoke at an official fans' meeting over proposals for a new 10-team top flight, which SPL chief executive Neil Doncaster also attended.

 

Johnston is unhappy at the split of revenue generated from the league being heavily weighted towards Rangers and Celtic and said the big two aren't leading from the front in our game.

 

He said: "If you're looking for leadership and vision from your two biggest clubs - regularly among the top 20 earners in Europe - then you aren't going to get it. I've been to these meetings and the Old Firm say nothing.

 

"They have not offered anything into this process to help the clubs lower down in Scottish football. It's the mid-table clubs who are being forced to take the risks and make all the sacrifices.

 

"We've been asked to take the risk that instead of a one-in-12 chance of relegation, we're going to be three out of effectively eight teams because you take Rangers and Celtic out of the equation.

 

"The Old Firm won't give up any of the finance they get at the moment in the new visionary structure for Scottish football.

 

"And they also won't give up their voting rights in matters that are crucial - a 9-1 majority would be required for changes in the 10-team top tier.

 

"Doncaster is a nice guy but he's a solicitor and it is evident that he has been given a brief to try and present and sell to everyone.

 

"There are a lot of holes in the argument and it doesn't float. We're getting a lot of statistics that don't stand up to scrutiny.

 

"One that stood out was this idea that there's some sort of fairness in the way the finances are distributed.

 

"Our league must be one of the worst in terms of being disproportionate. Most of the revenue goes to the Old Firm and that's a key point in this debate.

 

"It hasn't been addressed by the strategic review group and it has been totally batted aside in this report that has been put in front of the clubs. " Johnston - who backed the Record's bid for a 14-team league - is worried about the implications of a 10-team format for non-Old Firm clubs.

 

He said: "Three teams out of eight would be locked in a relegation battle all season. Everyone realises how fraught that would become and how negative the tactics would be.

 

"All of the clubs could be in that mix at some point during the season.

 

Stability "You could have your biggest clubs constantly locked in a relegation battle.

 

"It also means there's no financial stability. You'd have the two big clubs and the other eight would have to plan financially on a year-to-year basis. The reason for that is you could never be sure it wasn't your turn to be eighth, ninth or 10th in the league and get sucked into a relegation battle.

 

"You wouldn't be able to offer players contracts of more than 12 months without having lots of provisions written into them about wages going down.

 

"Negotiations with players are hard enough at the moment. But trying to negotiate a contract where you have the flexibility to terminate it at the end of each season would be a nightmare.

 

"Yet having a player on a longer contract is absolutely crucial if you have any chance of getting a transfer fee.

 

"It usually takes two or three years if someone is going to come through and prove themselves to be valuable.

 

"And if a player goes into their last year of a deal when someone starts to take notice of them their value reduces.

 

"The vast majority of fans and even managers are in favour of a bigger league. There are all sorts of arguments that could be put forward in favour of that but they're batted aside by Neil."

 

 

the man is a PR --K as are all things killie fear is his motivation as is the possible loss of money