The idea of an annual limit on how much a club can spend within the two designated transfer windows appeals to me. I reckon a figure of £20m during the summer would be a good limit, with another £10m maximum during the January window.

In the system I’m proposing, there would be some facets that allow for a club to spend extra. For example, one impact that cannot be accounted for is injuries - as in the case of Newcastle, who lost the services of Michael Owen for the entire 2006/07 season. In this situation, the club would be allowed to apply for funds (as currently exists) so they can continue to pay the crocked star's wages and transfer costs even though he isn't actually playing.

I would propose that the club be allowed to apply to spend extra during the upcoming window to replace the injured player with one of equal or lesser value. So the £20m during the summer would come and go, and if a player valued at, say, £11m is injured for more than half of the season, the club in question can spend £20m plus £11m over the summer window. That way, they are able to spend the equivalent of every other club, and still cover their injured players.

Those who disagree with this additional tenet should look at Newcastle’s league position this year.
Imagine where they might be with the addition of a healthy, goal-poaching Owen, flying alongside a healthy and creative Obafemi Martins or Shola Ameobi?

The Magpies have wobbled along admirably, yet they’ve got nothing to play for and very little to look forward to after another under-achieving season. If they’d been allowed to spend the funds, they’d likely have obtained a top-eight league position that they rightfully deserve, and gone further in the UEFA Cup and other domestic cup competitions. So much can change with a healthy star player, can’t it?

As the end of the season approaches and the bigger clubs ready themselves for the civil war that erupts when more than one club fixates on a player, the smaller clubs are hoping their squads aren’t decimated. It isn’t irrational to expect that over-achieving players will look to the bigger leagues to make a name for themselves, but it is unreal to reflect on clubs like Lyon, PSV and Ajax  and the hit they have taken collectively to their playing staff. The fact that they remain able to compete, win trophies and recruit more playing staff is testament to the fact that transferring players isn’t everything.

Every year, transfer spending gets larger and larger, and the realistic outcome is that this isn’t going to change. The Premiership’s new television rights deal means that English clubs are going to be wealthier than ever before. More money means more transfer dealings and further speculation as to who will come and who will go.

Part of the allure, and indeed the fun of following things during a transfer window, is tracking the bigger names and the young, highly-touted starlets. Everyone with a club close to their heart has an inherent desire to see their club sign a big name, or a potential world-class starlet. Nobody wants to see one club fly head and shoulders above the others.

Let’s take the new UEFA challenges in our stride as Michel Platini and his entourage present them. However, let’s add some colour to the mandate with further levelling options, including those in the transfer market. Take away the hegemony, the dominance of the ‘big four’ clubs and the ‘big three’ leagues, and let’s watch truly interesting football.

Do we need a more level playing field, as Matthew Wilson suggests? Leave a comment below or write an article for Sportingo.