The unanswered question about parachute payments which could affect Sheffield United

Administrators inside the governing body’s offices, located on rue Leo Delibes, a street surrounded by foreign embassies and classical museums in the capital’s 16th arrondissement, had been working on a plan which would see its leading clubs return to action later this summer.

But with Philippe declaring “The 2019/20 professional season cannot return”, that was immediately torn up and tossed into the dustbin, leaving the competition chiefs nursing an even bigger headache as broadcasters, sponsors and those at both ends of the table began studying the legal small print of their respective contracts.

With competitions in Belgium and Holland going the same way - although Germany and Italy remain committed to completing their domestic programmes - those petitioning the Premier League and the English Football League to follow suit and draw a line under the 2019/20 campaign will have been encouraged by Philippe’s instructions.

Although some believe the title, the race for Europe and the battle against relegation could be decided by calculating average points returns per game or other mysterious ‘sporting merit’ measures, others calling for a line to be drawn under the season argue it should be abandoned altogether; leaving PL and EFL members to share the cost of the lawsuits which would inevitably follow.

But this proposal fails to address the issue of parachute payments, which are distributed to teams who drop out of the top-flight and, given the sums involved, have been accused of ‘financially doping’ the Championship promotion battle.

It is an issue which could, given they were seventh in the table before the fixture schedule was suspended at the beginning of last month, directly affect Sheffield United and so is bound to interest officials at Bramall Lane.

Of the 36 clubs relegated from the PL since parachute payments were introduced, exactly a quarter have bounced back at the first time of asking. But a change to the way they are distributed four years ago means that, rather being spread over four years, the duration of the handouts are decided by how long a side has spent at the highest level. And it is this, given they are certain of remaining in the PL next term, which makes the confusion pertinent to United.

Had, as many so called experts predicted, Chris Wilder’s squad returned immediately to the EFL, they would have been owed only two years’ worth of parachute payments rather than the three the PL are now obliged to provide if they drop out in future.

United, as their manager reminded during a series of video interviews last week, are focused on continuing the remarkable progress they have made under his stewardship rather than fighting survival battles. But it is the responsibility of Wilder’s directors to try and cover every possible scenario - good or bad - which means the subject of parachute payments, should the season be declared null and void, would become worthy of serious discussion in South Yorkshire.

The sums involved - 55 per cent of a PL member’s annual broadcasting revenue share in the first year falling to 20 per cent in year three - means they are not to be sniffed at. For instance, the final payment, estimated to be worth around £15m, is around three times higher than the money Championship clubs receive from rights holders before live television matches are factored in.

The problems caused by annulling the campaign would filter down into the second tier too. Would, for example, West Bromwich Albion still receive two more year’s worth of payments or just one?

Presumably, with “null and void” meaning results are no longer legally valid, the answer is the former. But this has never been confirmed. And those arguing it is best to simply start afresh need to confront this issue.

Tomorrow, when United and the country’s other leading clubs meet to try and plot a course out of the chaos Covid-19 has wreaked upon the football schedule, those arguing for the most draconian course of action to be taken are unlikely to raise the parachute payment dilemma. Indeed, as The Star was told when it approached the PL for comment, competition chiefs are not prepared to be drawn into a debate about the matter.

Instead, the talks will centre on devising a strategy which would see matches return in June; subject to the necessary permissions from Downing Street and health professionals.

Publicly, United have adopted a “neutral stance” towards previous summits, pledging to listen to every proposal tabled before deciding how to cast their vote. But Wilder has been vocal in his opposition to those suggesting it is foolish to try and complete the remaining 92 matches, claiming football’s “integrity” would be threatened if placings are decided anywhere but the pitch.

Defender George Baldock echoed that sentiment during a round of interviews with the regional media on Wednesday.

Despite acknowledging he is "aware of the bigger picture" and the sacrifces those in wider society have made during the health crisis, the United defender said: "I can't see the logic of starting something without finishing it. That makes no sense to me."

An important message:

In order for us to continue to provide high quality and trusted local news, please purchase a copy of our newspapers or subscribe to thestar.co.uk.

The coronavirus lockdown is having a major impact on many of our local advertisers - and consequently the advertising that we receive. That means we are more reliant than ever on you helping us to provide you with news and information.

Our journalists are highly trained and our content is independently regulated by IPSO to some of the most rigorous standards in the world. But being your eyes and ears comes at a price. So we need your support more than ever to buy our newspapers and subscribe to our website during this crisis.

Stay safe and take care. Thank you, James.