Pointless

“In any other league a 10 point deduction might leave a club plummeting down the table. For #rangers it means 2nd place behind Celtic”

So tweeted STV journalist Debi Edward on the 14th February 2012 in response to the news that Rangers FC had entered administration and as a result had been docked 10 points by the Scottish Premier League.

This sort of hackneyed comment is often levelled at Scottish football. But is it strictly true?

I decided to look at Edward’s theory, looking primarily at the club in second place in each league, as Rangers were and still are.

Team	League	Position Now	-10 Points
Barcelona	Primera División	2	3
Juventus	Serie A	2	5 (goal difference)
Bayern Munich	Bundesliga	2	4
Montpellier	Ligue 1	2	2
Manchester United	FA Premier League	2	3
Porto	Primeira Liga	2	3
AZ	Eredivisie	2	6

So, in seven of (arguably) Europe’s best leagues, being deducted ten points wouldn’t result in a club ‘plummeting’ down the table. But why does this type of notion find favour in the UK? Scottish football, for as long as the near twenty-five years I’ve been following it, has been criticised for being uncompetitive, a two-horse race. This is despite the fact that most European leagues are dominated by (generally) a triumvirate. Sometimes this trio is stable (Netherlands for the most part, Portugal). Sometimes it’s less predictable; Germany for example.

In the twenty years since the inception of the Premier League in England, the title has been shared by four teams; Manchester United (12), Arsenal (3), Chelsea (3), and Blackburn Rovers (1). It should be noted that the Scottish top flight, since 1975, has oscillated between 10 and 12 teams, as compared to 18-20 favoured in England and many of the continental leagues. It could be argued that a two-horse race in a 12-team league (17% of teams are realistic title challengers) is more competitive than a three-horse race in a 20-team league (15%). But if people believe what they want to believe about Scottish football, they’re not going to listen to me.