Why are Glasgow Warriors playing a crucial RaboDirect Pro12 match on an evening that has minimised their preparation time and is utterly inconvenient for their valued supporters?

Here's the apparent explanation. Under the terms of the Pro12's broadcast agreement, BBC Alba, as the rights holder in the host country/province (delete according to view) had first call on when the match would be played if they wanted to show it live. They chose not to. This allowed BBC Wales to step in and dictate that the match be played when it suited them.

Sean Lineen, Glasgow's head coach, was consequently unable to name his team at the officially scheduled announcement on Thursday because he did not know who was available to him just two days ahead of the match.

To make matters worse, once BBC Wales decided to put it on live, Alba then opted to piggy-back on to that coverage which means that, not only are the Warriors having to play at what is an unfavourable time from their point of view, but the attendance could be affected by it being shown on a domestic channel.

In reality, that it will have little impact since most, if not all Scottish viewers, will take the BBC Wales option with its commentary in English, but it speaks to the sort of attitude to professional rugby in Scotland that has left one Scottish Rugby Union regime after another incensed at the BBC's lack of support.

It is not, of course, for the media generally to "support" sports teams, since our duty is to report as objectively as possible, but the BBC has an additional role as a public service broadcaster, which brings us to a wider issue that was highlighted last weekend.

In any normal country, the national broadcaster has control of its budgets and decision-making, but not in Scotland as we were reminded last weekend with the BBC's treatment of Scotland's First Minister.

Maybe my memory is playing tricks on me but, after Australia were beaten in the Ashes, I vividly recollect the Englishman who is Britain's Prime Minister wrapping himself in the flag – I can't recall if it was the St George's Cross or the Union flag – to celebrate the success of a team that draws itself from all over the British Isles yet forces even natives of the Republic of Ireland who want to play Test cricket to play for a team called England.

Setting aside just how clearly that demonstrates the confusion within the London establishment between the names England and Britain, the gag applied to Alex Salmond last weekend after he had initially been invited to take part in BBC Sport's Six Nations Calcutta Cup coverage raised serious questions.

The explanation offered that he should not take part because of "heightened tensions" regarding a referendum that will take place more than two years from now was couched in terms we are more inclined to associate with Ireland's "troubles".

Then again, should we be surprised by such behaviour from an organisation that carries in its name the word British?

Another question to ponder . . . would Scotland's First Minister be banned from appearing on Scottish television screens if Scotland had its own dedicated public service channels?

Furthermore, if such channels existed, political pressure from Scottish politicians to provide improved coverage of domestic sport would doubtless be rather more effective than it has been when dealing with an organisation that can be second guessed by people based in what – in sporting terms at least – is another country.

In those circumstances, too, you would like to think that national broadcasters would be making decisions that would help rather than hinder Scottish teams.

AND ANOTHER THING

Having made the first of the many breaks that Scotland failed to capitalise on because their players failed to do their jobs, Jim Hamilton, the Scotland lock, seemed utterly focused on improving on their efforts when he spoke after the match. Yet, within a couple of days, he was apparently sufficiently satisfied that things were back on course to feel able to critique the work of others.

"Just to confirm that there is no-one unsettled in the Scotland camp. The guy who wrote the piece in The Hearald (sic) has made up his own story," he asserted.

As "the guy" in question, let me reprint the words Hamilton used, as published in not only The Herald, but several other newspapers on Monday, inviting you to draw your own conclusion.

"I don't think it is about chopping and changing. We saw that, at the World Cup, with all the chopping and changing, guys were unsettled," he said.

Unlike the current Scotland rugby team, The Herald has a global reputation for accuracy. So, in the interests of maintaining our standards, I admit to unfamiliarity with a medium designed for those who do not have the attention span to deal in paragraphs, sentences or even, it seems, words rather than characters.

Consequently, I'm not sure whether I should be referring to Hamilton's tweets, tweeting or twittering. To avoid using the wrong terminology, then, let's just settle for hoping that, this time around, he and some of his team-mates manage to avoid playing like tw*ts.