NEIL MOXLEY Greed of the minority is stifling the majority

Follow us on Twitter: @peoplesport THE future of English football rests in the hands of 14 club owners.

And for the sake of what is left of genuine competition in this country we had all better hope that they hold their nerve in the years to come.

At this week’s annual Premier League shareholders’ meeting a motion was backed by – guess who – the top six.

Yes, Chelsea, Tottenham, Manchester City, Liverpool, Arsenal and Manchester United have been bleating on.

No prizes for guessing the subject of their complaint. Cash, and the perceived lack of it for them from overseas television rights. Bear with me here. At present, this money is divided equally with £39.1million going to each Premier League member.

What those gallant six wanted – as if English football wasn’t already skewed in their favour anyway – was a greater share of the pie.

In the words of former Liverpool chief executive Ian Ayre a few years ago: “No one i s subscribing in Kuala Lumpur to watch Bolton.”

This get- t ogether was so important to the Reds that owner John W. Henry and chairman Tom Werner pitched up in Harrogate to plead their club’s case. The idea has been floated at several meetings, but this time it was discussed on a more formal footing.

And so the big six this season outmuscled the rest. As they do pretty much every year.

This is why United can pay Zlatan Ibrahimovic £367,000 a week. And Swansea City, among others, can’t. For instance, in terms of the ‘facility fee’ – aka the number of times you appear live on TV – the top six clubs received an average of £31.8m each. The bottom six got £13.5m.

In terms of merit money, Chelsea received £ 38m for winning the league and United £29m for coming sixth. Swansea picked up £11.9m.

The disparity, purely in terms of prize money alone, is huge.

When you add on ticket sales, merchandising, corporate hospitality and all the rest of the circus that accompanies modern-day football, the gulf between the haves and have-nots is huge already. It impacts both the transfer fees and wages a club can afford to pay and now the big six want to take even more of the pie for themselves.

It is nothing but greed. And greed for greed’s sake, at that.

The Premier League’s elite clubs argue that they are the very essence of the league and that it is their brands who are responsible for delivering its growth. To an extent, they are right. But they have grown exponentially with the brand. The success of the Premier League and the likes of United and Liverpool is absolutely intertwined.

Their rise has taken place because of the league, not simply because they are members of it.

Now the big six clubs argue that the Premier League is nothing without them.

Personally, I would argue that the other 14 clubs are more important.

Why? Because if you are going to have a meaningful competition, then you need someone to pit your wits against.

And if there is to be any merit or integrity in that competition, the Premier League needs to level the playing field, not slant it in favour of the top six. In that respect, Ayre is wrong. Bolton, Bournemouth, Swansea or West Brom are more important as the big guns can’t just play each other a further four times a season.

ThThe Premier League needs to level the playing field, not slant it in favour of the top six