When it comes down to it, it’s a case of put up, shut up. If you don’t like it someone will take your place.

The message being sent out is that for Celtic to retain their competitive advantage and ensure 10-in-a row is adequately resourced – before the matter of the games begin – then it has to be a case of ‘as you were’ when it comes to season ticket renewals.

And that’s fine, though I wish they’d just say that. A wee bit of honesty now and then doesn’t go amiss. Yes I know but you can live in hope can’t you?

Everyone is trying to find a way of finding a route through this new normal for football. Players, fans, TV companies and those in the boardrooms are all having to find solutions on the hoof. And for the time being I actually find myself agreeing with the club, that maximising the income but still providing the best product they can in the circumstances, is the best way to ensure Celtic remain ahead of the game. That the club is in a position to drive home our advantage in the 10-in-a-row season. But are we all in this together or some being asked to pay a far higher price?

Players have taken pay cuts and deferrals, as have high ranking employees. Many fans have already kept last season refunds in the club. Those same supporters are now being asked to pay the cost of a full match experience for a closed doors game with piped in crowd noise, in the hope we get back through the turnstiles sooner rather than later. It’s a leap of faith but it’s one many will go for if we are all in it together and no-one is disadvantaged more than any other supporter.

Perhaps there is something missing though. A hand in the pocket from the major shareholders?

Another way to sell this expensive TV option would be an agreed investment to be returned when the club was back on an even keel or spread over a two or three year period. Even better one of those philanthropic gestures we’ve heard so much of recently. Okay that’s probably a stretch, but something at least that show we are all indeed in this together would be a gesture and may encourage uptake.

Like many, I don’t like the way the club have done this. Much like the convoluted refunds proposal, designed to discourage left a bad taste, as does this somewhat brazen take it or leave it consumer driven approach. But I agree with the thought process behind it when it comes to preserving the bank balance and keeping the assets in the squad, but again communicate that.

The Celtic Star has previously asked at the start of this Covid 19 shutdown, what happened about the club being insured against the financial impact of a pandemic? Supporters haven’t had that basic housekeeping request answered, yet the hand is out for money up front again.

Yet despite the lack of transparency and playing hard and fast with the truth, the only thing that ensures Celtic come out of this as ahead of the pack as we previously have is to have the ticket money coming in to maintain it. But perhaps a little more carrot and less stick would help too.

Asking fans to make this sacrifice should see confirmation from the club that they will do all they can to keep the core group of players who won 9-in-row together and if they do have to be sold, it will be due to the players request to leave, and not the clubs wish to sell. Call me a cynic but the recent resurfacing of the French Eddy contract talks seemed rather convenient. Considering those discussions have been ongoing since March and also taking onto account there appears no real progress to report, then why did it suddenly resurface in the last few days and just prior to this announcement?

Then there is the biggest problem of the whole renewal and the virtual ticket substitute. The thorny and ludicrously lopsided decision to ask households with multiple season tickets to pay full whack seems harsh to say the least. It’s something that was covered in great detail earlier today on The Celtic Star, and that inherent unfairness he highlighted is something that needs to be addressed. Everything else you can say there is a justifiable reason for doing, on this issue you simply cannot defend it.

In short, the current approach of households with more than one season ticket holder all having to pay, yet all watching on one TV – or even Laptop appears to be a possibility – is either ill thought out or something that was highlighted but was decided upon with a disdainful shrug of the shoulders.

Some supporters might feel that there is a hint of blackmail when you consider fans could lose their seat by standing up to this, but let’s hope it’s just been an oversight. Even if it wasn’t there is still time to right the wrong.

Adult season tickets are one thing but students, OAP’s and children could surely be exempt if they do not wish to take up the virtual season ticket option, or indeed do not have a broadband connection (or strong enough broadband depending on location) or already belong to a household who have a full paying season ticket holder. There are ways around this with a little care and attention afforded to it.

Given – and we’re very much taking on trust the board intentions here – the club have claimed there will be exclusivity for season ticket holders, then surely there is fairer solution.

Can the club not ask these supporters to buy the season tickets and then refund the games they cannot get into at a later date?

Celtic Supporters at Pittodrie in February

The money can then be backfilled by selling the subscriptions to those on the season ticket waiting list perhaps, those who advise they are willing to subscribe to the virtual season ticket, on the clear understanding that is all they are buying, for however long that lasts.

To encourage those places to be backfilled, those who agree to that option could be given some sort of extra priority within that waiting list, as and when a season tickets becomes available. Alternatively they could be offered subsidised match day tickets later in the season to encourage the take up.

That way it’s a far more of a volunteered solution on behalf of the supporter to take up the virtual ticket, and probably bought into by people who can afford to take that option. Rather than as it stands, those on low income like students and OAP’s – or the crazy situation of children who would in theory get a virtual season ticket without legally being able to actually own a broadband connection (bizarre) – paying through the nose or, via the Bank of Mum and Dad. Indeed anyone beyond the first person in a household to pay full price for a season ticket could have the opportunity of declining the virtual option but still retain their seat when the real product begins again.

TV companies I’m certain are the reason for capping the numbers to those who have purchased season tickets, but there surely is a compromise here that could be put forward. One that says the number of subscriptions will not exceed the amount of season tickets sold.

That way Celtic get their money, lower income and no income supporters get some security, in the knowledge they can retain their seat and supporters on the waiting list, whilst those who wouldn’t otherwise have got it, not only get to access the games via the virtual season ticket but can manoeuvre themselves up the queue in what is a lengthy waiting list with a rumoured 10,000 names on it.

There are pros and cons to every other argument when it comes to purchasing this year’s tickets, but there are no pros to households with multiple season tickets having their pockets picked by the club. That is simply a con.

Niall J