I FOUND myself with a dilemma when reading Gordon Smith’s column last Saturday (And another thing..., April 17). He fears that Fifa threatens to abolish the football teams of Scotland and the other three nations, creating a GB team instead.

Like everyone else I don’t want to lose our team, especially in its current resurgence. Conversely the loss could, unintentionally, be a very big asset towards independence. If you’re worried, read on for a solution.

I’ve written to The National before to say that 60% support is needed to win indyref2. Anything less leaves us at the whim of the “don’t knows”. They and wavering No voters are the target to win over. For some time I’ve thought that one or more game-changers are needed to raise our support from 49% to 61%. That is not to decry the hard work done by individuals and groups on the ground. But game-changers operate at the large scale.

How do we react to such foreseen events – do we ignore them? Or do we acknowledge them, seeing a possible chance to benefit the indy cause?

The pandemic has been one example. No reasonable person can claim Nicola Sturgeon tried to exploit her position for political gain. Rather the very opposite. She tackled the crisis as the duty of a responsible leader. That approach along with her daily updates was appreciated by the public, as shown by the unexpected boost to support. Despite a subsequent small drop in the surveys, the Holyrood election polls indicate a strong leaning towards independence.

Brexit has its own special type of calamity, which many forecast would happen. Only after a long lead up to its January 1 start and a slow introduction to reality since then is the damage being felt, such as unavailable foods, higher taxation on goods from the EU and beyond, extra costs on holiday flights. We can hope that Scots disillusioned with Boris and his cronies turn to swell the Yes votes to 60%.

Eradicating the Scottish football team would undoubtedly qualify as a major event across the country and the diaspora. The campaign to unite the four UK teams has been around for some time. The four nations were granted that special status by Fifa for inventing football with reasonable and practical rules, and also for introducing the game around the British empire and to other countries through its global trading links. Having one country, Great Britain, represented by four teams is now regarded as grossly unfair in the eyes of some countries, as well as being considered a privilege from long-past imperialism: these are changing times.

Reading the proposal for a GB team a few years back I was immediately struck by what it meant for Scotland: participation, identity and pride would be affected. Without a national team to watch, all its “former” supporters would be furious, whether they be followers in the Tartan Army, fans who go through the gates, or those in the bars or sitting at home in front of the TV. The team of players in blue embodies the hopes and emotions of thousands of people.

The question hardly needs asking as to how many Scots would support a GB team rather than a Scotland one. Even those not interested in football recognise the national team stand as an icon on par with the Saltire: they are both part of what Scotland is. Without the team Scotland is demeaned. It will no longer be standing next to the other football countries in the world.

To suffer both disappointment and disengagement is bad enough. Even worse is the insult that Scotland with its long football record, and as a country of several hundred years would not just be discounted but be trodden on, not worthy of representing itself on the football field. How can anyone but a Unionist be proud of living in a secondhand nation subservient to another country?

I’ve sometimes wondered “what if”. In my daydream all three unexpected events are likely to deliver substantial Yes voters, which together could top the crucial statistic.

Losing the football team would probably raise the most support, as an immediate, identifiable provocation to thousands of people. I envisaged most voting Yes to express their resentment, knowing independence will secure the national football team. The popularity of football alone could bring enough votes to reach the magic 60%.

“What if – that won’t happen” you say. But yet... in three days a closed league of 12 big clubs has been proposed and rejected. Fans, club managers, players, even Westminster politicians unanimously protested to stop it. People’s power has set the precedent that football’s might of money can be halted.

In England ‘what if’ has become reality. They rallied intensively and quickly against the concept. If they can do it, so can we. Winning over irate Scottish fans shouldn’t be that difficult.

The paradox in my dilemma is that the Scottish football team has to be dissolved for all this to happen. On the other hand, if it continues to exist for several years indy ref2 may have been lost, which would not be good for independence or the national team.

However, Fifa may well welcome having another country in its remit, Scotland. To ensure this the SFA should negotiate with Fifa for a velvet glove transition, seeking that no action be taken until indyref2’s result is known. If that is Yes, then Fifa should postpone a proposed GB team as Fifa accepts Scotland is an independent country and with its own football team.

Robert Walker
Kinross