Perhaps there were some who had hoped for a dossier of lurid juiciness.

Maybe the more excitable had anticipated something along the lines of Neil Doncaster doing a Donald Findlay circa May 1999, only with the songbook taking a significant deviation.

In actual fact, the document released by Rangers on Thursday morning was drier than a Mormon bar. There was no leery, easy headline and little to cause any real shock.

Indeed, there was little to cause surprise at all.

In any case, by Thursday evening Rangers MD Stewart Robertson was on air attempting to tailor the narrative away from bullying and coercion. His own interview may well have further derailed any attempts Rangers have of collating enough votes on Tuesday to bring forth the independent investigation that the Ibrox side crave.

Even ignoring the tweet on Thursday morning that declared Rangers would not be “bullied into silence,” the Ibrox club themselves on April 11 intimated strongly that there had been foul play when their statement suggested “a lack of fair play and even-handedness.”

The irony is that had Rangers opted for a softer hand in the first place, they may well have had a stronger case.

Evidence of bullying, corruption and coercion was lacking.

What the dossier did shine a light on was what many suspected; that the process itself was poorly managed, fairly crude and lacked structure and cohesion. That there could have been significantly better governance over the entirety of the whole affair seemed fairly obvious some weeks back.

That there are to be questioned asked of the SPFL and the manner in which they have handled the current crisis remain. The biggest question and criticism of all continues to point towards Dundee and what exactly went on around the botched, increasingly infamous, vote last month.

But ultimately there was very little that came forth into the public domain this week that wasn’t already there. The one detail that was fresh was the suggestion that clubs were not told about the possibility of a £10million bill to Sky if the season was not concluded.

It is difficult to view it as anything other than a moot point; for one, it seems a fairly obvious concern that the broadcaster would potentially take action after the league obligations went unfulfilled. But what might have been the financial consequence if the league were to be declared null and void?

The other option, to replicate the English proposals of playing in neutral venues and behind closed doors, would not come cheaply either given the testing costs for 42 football clubs to play their season to a conclusion.

The more prescient question, now, in the midst of a global pandemic, a looming economic crisis and the biggest threat to football that the game has seen in Scotland as clubs struggle to stay afloat financially throughout this time, is where do we go now?

In the light of yesterday’s letter from the SPFL to all member clubs yesterday afternoon that barely concealed their own simmering fury, there is little doubt that after the inevitability of Robertson being removed from the board, the civil war will continue to dominate.

On the basis of Thursday’s evidence, it seems unlikely that clubs will vote in favour of an independent investigation. Where it goes then is up to Rangers. Having put themselves in this position, there is a fair bet that to save face at least they will carry their argument all the way to court.

Who foots the bill for that?

But the bigger cost is the lack of focus on what should be the main concern at the minute; enabling clubs to survive amidst the most challenging of times and a time when there is no end in sight.

Instead, we are all caught in the crossfire of the war of words and the bitter recriminations that have been left in the wake of April’s vote on how to conclude the season.

There are ample criticisms to be made of the SPFL. They stand accused of being haughty in their dealings. A full-on review of Scottish football and how it is governed is overdue and would be welcome by many.

But right now the focus and the narrative has to move on to the bigger picture.

And another thing

What about the curious case of Daniel Arzani?

The 21-year-old confirmed this week that he will formally leave Celtic next week when his two-year loan contract expires.

Having joined Celtic after the 2018 World Cup, the Australian played a total of just 28 minutes for the Parkhead side after suffering a cruciate ligament injury on his debut.

The suggestion is that a similar exit looms for Marian Shved. The 22-year-old winger was signed by Brendan Rodgers before being immediately loaned back to Karpaty Lviv but has featured for just 15 minutes this season.

Had Celtic gone on and clinched the title with games to spare, perhaps there would have been game time for the likes of Arzani and Shved to at least offer an opportunity to showcase themselves.

As it stands, their flagging Parkhead careers may have been finished off by the virus.