Blazers, heal thyselves. That is the subtext of the confidential report from PKF, accountants and business advisers, into the finances and administration of the Scottish Football League (SFL). The report was commissioned by the SFL. It is no whitewash. It paints a picture of an organisation that is inefficient, weak, crying out for new blood and fresh thinking, ripe for change (including a cut in staffing and payroll costs), complacent and, in relation to IT, in need of being dragged into the 21st century.

If the SFL were itself a football team it would probably be relegation fodder. In reality, it represents the 30 clubs of the Scottish first, second and third divisions and is responsible for the CIS Insurance Cup and the Challenge Cup. It is but one layer in the byzantine organisational structure of Scottish football. The Scottish Football Association is responsible for the national team, Scottish Cup, amateur football and grassroots development. The Scottish Premier League's remit encompasses teams in the top flight.

Further change could be on the way if first division clubs join the SPL (as SPL 2) and compete with the top teams for a new cup. This would reduce the influence, and the earning power, of the SFL as it would have fewer teams to represent and the viability of the CIS Cup would be undermined. It was against this backdrop that PKF was commissioned. The consultantcy thinks the above scenario is the most likely outcome in the longer term. It says that, unless the SFL faces up to the potential consequences, it will be left with a cost base grossly out of kilter with income streams. It is clear from the report that failing to respond is not a option. Helpfully, the consultants identify a way forward by pointing out that the Nationwide Conference in England operates with similar staffing levels to the SFL but half of the salary costs. It is surprising to learn that the six-figure salary of the SFL secretary, Peter Donald, has not been reassessed since being negotiated, when revenues were 65% higher than at present. It is, frankly, astonishing that a high-profile business in the digital age (as the SFL is) does not view IT or a website as a priority.

A positive by-product of the report is in the way it makes the case for collaboration (although the men who run Scottish football might not see it this way). Given the financial pressures facing the game, it is verging on the irresponsible that the SFA, the SPL and the SFL continue with their own, discrete player registration systems. This wastes money. The opportunity to share a registration database must be seized at the earliest opportunity. Doing so could mark the beginning of a process leading to the bloated governance of Scottish football being streamlined. Commissioning this report and countenancing external scrutiny is one thing. The true test of the report will be whether the SFL is prepared to act upon it and, on a wider front, how the other blazers in Scottish football respond.