Matt Maher: Football’s bosses need to learn the lessons - but will they?

Back in the early 2000s, Leeds United – who went from Champions League semi-finalists to Championship in the space of three years – were supposed to provide a salutary lesson on the dangers of spending beyond your means.

But like any good capitalist economy, the Premier League continued to grow. Just when you thought the salaries and transfer fees could not get any larger, so the next multi-billion pound TV deal was signed to ensure the cash kept rolling in.

This had been the case for so long, no-one could have envisaged a scenario where it would suddenly stop. At least, that is, until now.

It is far too soon to predict the short or long-term impact the coronavirus crisis will have on the Premier League.

Old habits die hard.

Even at a time when some clubs are warning of a potential financial disaster, there will be others hoping they can simply pick up business as usual once the sport resumes.

What the shutdown has already exposed is the illusion of the richest football league in the world.

The 20 top-flight clubs might pull in revenues but the manner in which they operate, with the majority of the funds immediately transferred into the bank accounts of the players, means few are cash rich and that makes them very vulnerable to the kind of unexpected events we are witnessing now.

How else do you explain some of the muddled, almost panicked thinking displayed so far, most notably from the likes of Tottenham and Newcastle, whose decision to place non-playing staff on furlough was only ever going to result in minimum benefit but maximum derision.

In the interests of balance, it should be pointed out none of the clubs who have taken such measures (Bournemouth and Norwich have also done the same) have done anything technically wrong.

The government placed no limits on which businesses could apply for the job retention scheme and both British Airways and McDonald’s – two companies whose revenues far outstrips that of any football club – are among those to have taken it up.

But then no airline or fast-food chain flashes its wealth around in the way the Premier League does.

It is doubtful the chancellor, when announcing the scheme last month, imagined football clubs – who are due to receive a combined £2.5billion simply for having matches televised – would be among the first to take up the offer. Not least Spurs, last season’s Champions League finalists whose chairman, Daniel Levy, had just received a £3million bonus for presiding over the building of an £850m stadium.

Most clubs, including both of the West Midlands top-flight representatives, recognised the outcry turning to the taxpayer for help would cause.

At Villa, for example, the notion of furloughing non-playing staff is not thought to have even been discussed at boardroom level. In Nassef Sawiris and Wes Edens, the club has two billionaire owners who have invested more than £250million since taking charge in July, 2018. For now, they will pick up the shortfall. Ditto Fosun at Wolves.

It was the furloughing of non-playing which led to the spotlight falling on the players. As noted in this space before in recent weeks, it is the players who receive most of the Premier League’s riches. Last season more than half of the clubs in the top flight spent more than 70 per cent of their income on wages. At a time when sport, like society, needs to pull together, they are the ones best placed to help.

But like anyone else being asked to give up a portion of their wages or contribute to a charitable fund, they are entitled to ask just how or what their money is going to help.

Much as it is easy to pick faults in the PFA’s approach to the crisis – it was, for starters, dreadfully slow to act – there has also been a fair amount of sense contained in the statements made during negotiations with the Premier League over a collective pay reduction.

Players do contribute huge amounts to the economy – and the NHS – in the form of taxes, money which will be reduced should they agree to a wage cut.

It is also fair for the players to question just how urgently clubs need the money.

True, clubs have already missed out on gate receipts from postponed matches but have already received the final £762million installment of broadcasting revenue for this season. The fear, driving most of the current thinking, is that broadcasters will demand the money back should the season not be completed.

But we have not reached that stage yet and players will understandably wonder whether, should they agree to a wage cut, the clubs won’t be soon spending the proceeds whenever the next transfer window opens.

Premier League footballers are, of course, an easy target but the notion they are ignorant of the world around them is in the vast majority of cases misguided.

The efforts of Jordan Henderson to create a fund into which players can donate towards the NHS and community causes is evidence of that.

Consideration also needs to be given to what is happening below the top flight because while the Premier League might appear to be verging on crisis, it is nothing compared to what is happening further down the pyramid, where clubs are going to very quickly find themselves in big trouble and some could even go out of business.

It is too early to say whether the pandemic will fundamentally change the way Premier League clubs operate.

All the evidence so far suggests it needs to.