Peace in our extra-time, but now for a new battleground

Back from the brink: Bitter rivals suddenly all sweetness and light while revolutionary talk is in the air again

So, the war is over. No, not that one, although at a time when British forces are poised to sacrifice their lives in Afghanistan it tends to place this absurd, unseemly wrangle over the right of professional footballers to their employing clubs' television money into perspective. There is now no chance that those who questioned the validity of industrial action, such as Aston Villa's David James, will have to fight their way through placard-waving pickets, screaming "scab", in order to reach the pitch.

It has been said that the sides have fought out an honourable score-draw, though there have been those who adjudge the outcome to have been "a substantial victory" for Gordon Taylor and his Professional Footballers' Association, which is possibly the first time anyone has rewritten history 24 hours after it has happened.

Richard Scudamore, the chief executive of the Premier League, was probably more accurate when he told me last night: "It was a very good deal for us, but there were no winners. There was no bitterness on either side. In fact, after the negotiations were concluded, we sat in the bar of a Manchester hotel with Barry Horne [the PFA chairman] and Brendan Batson [deputy chairman] and other members of the PFA negotiating team and enjoyed a good drink."

In industrial relations terms that moment, shortly after the two sides had concluded an agreement, was an aeon away from the impasse that had been reached on Wednesday morning, when a Premier League insider muttered to me: "This is treachery. It's all about one man's ego."

The success of Taylor, the PFA chief executive, has been to emerge, at least in the short term, without that perceived sizeable ego being noticeably diminished, and indeed without his reputation being terminally damaged, which had been a distinct possibility if the union had continued their campaign to the point where his members had downed kitbags.

Calling a strike at the moment he did, and rejecting the £50 million offered, had the same effect as someone trampling over a beehive. The Premier League chairmen had been prepared to leave negotiations in the hands of Scudamore and the Manchester United director and lawyer Maurice Watkins, and had hitherto been relatively docile, other than to stress that their players would not be paid if they went on strike. Suddenly, the stingers were out.

Privately, the Premier League and their Football League counterparts, led by chief executive David Burns, were astonished at Taylor's behaviour. As one source told me: "We kept our powder dry until the last moment and honestly thought that Gordon would accept the offer. We were amazed when he reacted as he did."

It was at this point, late on Tuesday night, that Scudamore recognised that exceptional tactics were called for, with the PFA appearing to be winning the PR battle. But first he rang the Football Association's chief executive, Adam Crozier, who previously had been acting purely as a mediator, and asked him for his support. Crozier duly agreed that the £50m offer was a reasonable one, and at a press conference the following day confirmed that stance.

It was followed by what Scudamore described as "a massive sea-change in public opinion". With one or two exceptions, it was the media as a whole (and not just Mr Murdoch's organ, which yesterday was effectively claiming that it was "the Sun wot won it") that turned on Taylor and transformed the course of events.

Evidence was produced which at least suggested that the players had been misled factually, and there were demands for a new ballot, given that the offer from the Premier League and Football League had been improved upon since the first vote had been taken. Serious doubts were beginning to permeate the players' minds. Significantly, Premier League sources have commended PFA chairman Horne's contribution as a reason for a successful conclusion to the dispute.

"Barry was a credit to the negotiations," I was told. "He realised that enough was enough."

When one absorbed the fact that employers were offering £50m over three years to support a union which receives relatively little from its own members, it suddenly appeared terribly reasonable. By Thursday morning, the PFA chief executive knew that he had no alternative but to seek a compromise, and the two-and-a-half-million top-up on Friday allowed Taylor to hail some kind of triumph, although the percentage figure of 2.42 is the same as the PFA had been receiving, and far removed from the five per cent they had demanded.

From the Premier League point of view, the devil was in the detail, and the fact that it was agreed to remove any clauses that could be construed as an agreement that the issue was a trade dispute is regarded as a significant factor.

In a sense, of course, it is a victory for Taylor in that he has managed to extract so much from the Premier League and Football League to finance the administration of his own organisation. Though many deserving causes exist – both those players who fail to make the grade and those who retire early because of injury – they also do in many other industries, whose union members have to accept support from their fellow members, not their employers.

"I don't want to damage this game," Taylor said on Friday night. "I would have failed as a negotiator if we had called a strike. As a union leader I don't want to do that as it causes so many problems to the football public. As for it being a victory for the PFA, I leave you to draw your own conclusions. We are very satisfied. It was an opportunity to make people much more aware of what the PFA does. I think this is an extremely seminal moment in the history of football and the players' association and, hopefully, a new dawn for the game."

It is probable that certain Premier League chairmen, who on average are re-routing around 90 per cent of TV money directly into players' wage packets, are distinctly unimpressed by the course of events. What the dispute has achieved is laying bare for the public at large the realities of the financing of football. Though television, on whose enormous funds the game relies for its well-being, has largely kept out of the dispute, the BBC's Greg Dyke undoubtedly spoke for all that industry when he warned that the game will never see the like of the current deal again. Indeed, it is known that ITV are keen to renegotiate their deals.

It is fear of the future, and to a certain extent deep concern about the current financial plight of clubs such as relegated Coventry City, that is responsible for initial talks reportedly having taken place about a so-called "Premiership Division Two" breakaway league, which might eventually involve Celtic and Rangers. It would be an inevitable and sensible extension to the formation of the Premier League a decade ago, but it would require a thorough analysis before it gained approval, to ensure that the impact on the remaining Nationwide League clubs is not too damaging. The recent exposure provided by the dispute has confirmed that football is further away from the supporters than ever. Any push for restructuring could give the game the shot in the arm it requires.

Burns said yesterday that while no plans currently existed, any new league would need a new broadcasting contract. "ITV are reportedly wanting to renegotiate the present deal, and any breakaway clubs would need a broadcasting contract otherwise they would have no money," he said. "In addition, the setting up of an additional competition would require the sanction of the Football Association, and promotion and relegation issues would be involved."