It is tempting to imagine the drama currently being served up by Scottish football as a gift to distract fans at a time of overwhelming trauma.
By mid-afternoon yesterday, there was already plenty of intrigue surrounding Dundee’s failure to make good on promises to help torpedo the SPFL’s plan to “call time” on the season for the three lower divisions.
Michael Stewart, the former Hearts midfielder, had listened to fellow Radio Scotland pundits tell of having seen the Dens Park club’s actual ‘No’ vote – subsequently published online – and complained of “something stinking to high heaven”.
There was talk of clubs having been browbeaten by the ruling body, plus widespread criticism of the move to link the paying of cash to clubs with a vote that will determine promotion and relegation.
There was nothing, though, to prepare listeners for the incendiary statement released by Rangers.
It called for the suspension of SPFL’s Chief Executive Neil Doncaster and legal advisor, Rod McKenzie, to allow an independent investigation into the body’s stewardship of the vote.
Why? Because the club had been presented with “alarming evidence via a whistleblower” that raised serious concerns about the process.
More than that, it said, it raised questions about the corporate governance of the SPFL.
Referring to failed attempts to get satisfaction through approaches to the League and Doncaster himself, it said Rangers would not be “bullied” into silence.
Their choice of words was powerful and evocative, bringing to mind the sort of clandestine scenes which might be witnessed in a Hollywood spy film.
There was devilishness in the detail, and here again came the suspicion of bored fans being served up high-quality entertainment.
Douglas Park, Rangers’ interim chairman, referred to the “farcical conduct of this affair” and called it an example of an “undemocratic culture”.
Such a head-on attack – and clearly, if proven, the allegations have the potential to take down Doncaster – is rare, even from one of the country’s powerhouse clubs.
The decision to release it would not have been taken lightly and, from the outside, the timing is critical.
Rangers were angered by the League’s dismissal of their plan to release prize money to clubs at the end of the week.
It was, the SPFL said, legally “ineffective”.
That judgment, though, taps into the key issue for many of Doncaster’s critics.
The League is a members’ organisation, so why in these unprecedented times is it not able to rip up the rulebook and change the articles to put in place solutions which benefit and support all the country’s clubs?
Why, in this time of great stress and uncertainty, are all the clubs – who, after all, are the SPFL – not given all the money due to them straight away?
Yes, there is a counter argument that with eight games of the unfinished campaign still potentially to be played, clubs could have fallen from their position.
Here, though, there is a simple solution. Pay the cash now and if the games do go ahead – something that now looks increasingly unlikely – deduct any over-payment from next season’s settlement.
The rush to call time on the lower leagues – a move that would set the precedent for terminating the remaining Premiership games and install Celtic as champions, even though they could mathematically be caught – is also curious.
A desire not to compromise the League’s pitch with SKY has been cited as a reason. But would the broadcasters really object to a split campaign?
The main issue for the SPFL right now is not to justify its thought processes, but to defend its integrity.
It was no surprise the attack prompted a quick response, the essence of which can be distilled to a challenge to put up or shut up.
The ball is back in Rangers court. From the sidelines, Scottish football’s watching audience collectively hold their breath.