Trouble is, it's all through a media lens. I'm not sure exactly how good a job a person does based on their remit. For instance, I believe Doncaster was there to obtain as much money for the SPL as possible. That obviously means getting Rangers on board. The sporting integrity bit was down to the clubs and the SFA. So, was Doncaster actually being criticised for something not in his contract, i.e. fairness and 3rd Division, rather than finances and 1st Division as he put the case for? I also don't think it was his job to detail the sharing of the cash. So, if he gets the TV deals, then Celtic take it all, leaving other clubs with beans, is that his fault if other clubs then crash?
Just to emphasise, I'm not saying Doncaster has done a good job. But is his remit finance, marketing or fair play? I don't think I have enough facts for a judgement. Possibly, a spokesman is needed to sell our game more (an Ally McCoist/Gordon Strachan-media friendly larger-than-life optimist). After all, last season was the most exciting in years. Then let the moneymen take a backseat, getting deals based on that media presence. At the moment, I don't find PR taken seriously at all.