SCOTTISH clubs could be in line for an estimated $100,000 windfall under a FIFA scheme which aims to reward those which supplied players, and helped develop others, for the World Cup in France.
It is understood 17 have applied, and also fit the criteria, for the FIFA Women’s World Cup Clubs Benefits Programme. It has an overall budget of almost $8.5m to compensate clubs which not only provided players for World Cup squads, but those which trained them from the ages of 12 to 22. That can apply even for a single season.
The biggest beneficiaries by some distance should be Glasgow City and Hibernian, both of whom had players in Shelley Kerr’s squad and developed others at youth level. Fifteen other clubs are also believed to have applied and should benefit.
In the case of Rangers, for example, Lana Clelland, Nicola Docherty and Erin Cuthbert were all at the club within the relevant training period. At Celtic, Chloe Arthur, Jen Beattie, Fiona Brown, Leanne Crichton and Christie Murray come into this category.
While this seems fairly clear cut, the Scottish FA say they will take time to decide how best to spend their own $750,000 windfall for Scotland’s World Cup qualification. It is understood, although not confirmed because the settlement is confidential, that $250,000 of this has already been allocated to the players. That’s just under £200,000.
Split evenly among the 23 who went to France that would amount to £8,700 each, but presumably those who contributed in the qualifying games will also be rewarded. Most notable among these is Arsenal left-back Emma Mitchell, who played in seven of the eight games leading to the finals but didn’t go to France. Minutes on the pitch will presumably also have been a factor in whatever agreement the players have reached amongst themselves.
With the player payments settled, that leaves the SFA with just under £400,000 ($500,000) from Fifa sitting in their bank account. Chief executive Ian Maxwell said unequivocally that all of this would be reinvested in the women’s game when he was in Rennes for the game against Japan.
Maxwell wouldn’t elaborate on this when the question was put to him last week – but a spokesman said the intention is to genuinely reinvest, and not use the money to replace funds already earmarked for women’s football.
That is an obvious suspicion, because finances are tight at Hampden, but it does also make sense to think carefully about how to spend the World Cup money if that indeed is what's happening. The windfall has to be used in areas which will deliver the best results.
The SFA, rather oddly, doesn't have a strategy for women's football – but needs one. Much of the recent successes are attributable to initiatives which Anna Signeul, the previous head coach, and Sheila Begbie, the former head of girls' and women's football, arm-wrestled the governing body into implementing.
It is now vital to build on the vastly heightened public awareness of the sport following the World Cup. Remarkably, the three recent Scotland U19 Euro games attracted average crowds of around 1100 – even if the manner of defeat against Norway and Netherlands didn't inspire optimism for the future.
How the best young players are being developed is one obvious area for review, while the SFA say they are also going to take time to consider how to replace Donald Gillies as head of girls' and women's football. Gillies is departing to take up a post at MLS club Colorado Rapids, having created a favourable impression during his time in the job.
Only the most hardened cynic would suggest that the cost of a salary will be saved while the Association ponder whether to replace like with like or take a different approach to the position.
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here