On the day the Premier League signed their £5.136 billion television deal, the talk at Manchester United was not, you may be disappointed to hear, about reducing ticket prices.

The power to take on Real Madrid. That is what the latest windfall means to United’s hierarchy. Gareth Bale, Cristiano Ronaldo, David de Gea, the future of Radamel Falcao. Getting Madrid’s tanks off the Old Trafford lawns. That is the game-changer here.

Manchester United believe they at last have the financial clout to go toe-to-toe against the giants of Spain. This summer, the battle begins.

The new £5bn Premier League TV deal will give Man United boss Louis van Gaal greater powers to choose whichever players he wants in the transfer market and take on Real Madrid for the prize assets

Radamel Falcao has not done enough so far to persuade Van Gaal to sign him permanently in the summer

Falcao's fate already seems to be sealed and he will return to parent club Monaco at the end of the season

First casualty, Falcao as a permanent addition to the United squad. The decision appears to have been made several weeks ago.

The Colombia striker will complete his loan deal until the end of the season and will then be released into the tender arms of Monaco and, quite possibly, another third party ownership group to be hawked around the biggest clubs in Europe.

Falcao is hoping to stay with United and may feel that injury has prevented him from showing his best form, but at £285,000 per week, and turning 30 in the middle of next season, it would be an expensive gamble for United to make any deal permanent.

It is not known whether recent knee surgery has permanently limited his powers, or whether a full pre-season programme would return him to previous heights.

Either way, United will be paying through the nose to find out and it is not a risk worth taking — particularly now the Premier League deal has introduced the possibility of other business.

Hopes were high when Van Gaal signed Falcao on transfer deadline day last September

But glorious moments, like this one against Everton at Old Trafford, have been in short supply

David Beckham swapped Manchester United for Real Madrid in the summer of 2003

Plainly, the grand plan requires Champions League football, but United feel that the new television contract, coupled with their powerful commercial arm, gives them the ability to overtake Real Madrid as the richest club in the world. At that moment, they will at last be able to resist raids on their staff — and perhaps mount a few of their own.

The traditional route is Manchester United to Real Madrid. It is not particularly well-trodden, but three major players have gone that way since 2003.

David Beckham was the first. It is widely believed that Sir Alex Ferguson wanted him out of the club, but the manager’s autobiography makes plain that Beckham’s decline as a United player coincided with rumours that Madrid were courting him.

Ruud van Nistelrooy had a clause in his contract stating he could leave for £35m if Madrid came in: Ferguson says he was never the same after that, and ultimately left for substantially less.

Then there was Ronaldo. Real Madrid was his dream club and United could not prevent his departure.

This season has brought an issue with De Gea. A few weeks back it looked as if Madrid held all the aces, with the player’s contract due to expire at the end of next season, enabling him to talk to continental clubs from January 2016.

Beckham receives a hero's welcome from thousands of Real Madrid fans at his official unveiling

Ruud van Nistelrooy is unveiled as a Real Madrid player after leaving Old Trafford in 2006

Now United will feel they have a better chance of keeping him. The attitude of his agent, Jorge Mendes, appears to be softening and if Madrid were preparing to outstrip United financially, that may no longer be possible.

De Gea has been United’s best player this season and it is unlikely they would have remained in the Champions League places with a lesser goalkeeper. United chief executive Ed Woodward may now be in the mood to recognise that.

Cristiano Ronaldo also moved from Manchester to Madrid, for a then-world record £80m in 2009

The Portuguese takes a glance at Real Madrid's trophy cabinet during his official Bernabeu unveiling

David de Gea has been in outstanding form for United this season, but is endlessly linked with Madrid

De Gea makes a save from Manchester City striker Sergio Aguero during the derby back in November

Of course, there will always be players unable to resist the mystique of Madrid, whatever the numbers, yet United are now better placed to rebound from such a blow. Suddenly, a summer move for Bale does not seem so fanciful.

It had been mentioned in the swirl around De Gea, but quickly dismissed. Even if losing Bale provided the way into De Gea’s transfer, why would Madrid entertain that? United cannot compete for Bale financially, the player does not want to leave and De Gea will be available on a free transfer at the end of next season, anyway. That has all changed.

Yes, United can compete financially. Certainly Bale will become increasingly disenchanted with Madrid if he is targeted by angry fans — and what if United secure De Gea’s future with a new contract? Then it is Madrid who might come under attack, stuck with an unhappy player and a hugely wealthy predatory rival offering him a way out.

Bale came in for criticism after Cristiano Ronaldo's now infamous reaction to his misplaced pass in last month's La Liga match with Espanyol

Bale has come in for criticism from the Bernabeu crowd in recent matches

Might they be able to turn Ronaldo’s head, too; or at least make some mischief by providing him with an option on the days he feels sad and unloved?

Deloitte’s list of the world’s richest clubs placed Real Madrid top with revenue of £406.1m and Manchester United in second place, with £382.9m. United overtook Barcelona and, without doubt, have Madrid next in their sights.

And while there are other leagues that matter more to the best footballers in the world, Deloitte’s speaks of commercial capacity. Putting prices down is a long way from United’s thinking at the moment: right now they are only looking up, up, up.

England's James Taylor remonstrated with umpire Aleem Dar as australia's George Bailey smiles

Sometimes referees and umpires make mistakes. We know that. We have sympathy. An incident judged in real time with the naked eye is very different from one viewed with the benefit of television replays.

What happened in Melbourne on Saturday was different.

The men in charge of the World Cup group match between Australia and England did not know the rules. The error they made in giving James Anderson run out, when the ball was dead, stranding James Taylor on 98, was not a simple judgment call. It was like not knowing the bails had to come off, or that a catch with a foot on the boundary rope is a six.

Video replays have made the rules more complex, yet for umpires and match referees not to know them is inexcusable. It is incredible that the ICC are not taking this further.

When Josh Hazlewood appealed for lbw against Taylor and umpire Aleem Dar raised his finger, the ball became dead. Taylor having successfully appealed the decision — it was going down leg, and that was a genuine mistake, which is understandable — the third umpire Billy Bowden then considered a run-out appeal against Anderson, and Kumar Dharmasena, at square leg, dismissed him, ending the innings.

They should all be stood down. As should Jeff Crowe, the match referee, for not intervening, and Joel Wilson, the fourth umpire, if it can be established he was in any position to influence this calamitous climax and, also, was unaware of the rule.

Taylor appeals to umpire Dar after being given out lbw, bringing the match to an end

Taylor stands his ground after the incorrect decision is made, handing victory to Australia

For the record, it states: ‘If following a Player Review request, an original decision of ‘Out’ is changed to ‘Not Out’, then the ball is still deemed to have become dead when the original decision was made (as per Law 23.1(a)(iii)).’

Fairly unequivocal, that.

Sir Ian Botham, calling the game for television, knew it. So did Taylor, who could be seen telling the officials that the ball was dead.

James Anderson (left) and Taylor walk off dejected after the galling end to England's World Cup opener

It took the chaps in the studio a matter of minutes to locate the correct passage (Article 3.6a of Appendix 6 of the Decision Review System Playing Conditions), meaning that one of the three men sat in control booths could have looked up, or sent for, the information even if the two on the pitch were flummoxed.

The ICC are very fortunate that England’s performance was so abject that the decision had no bearing, beyond denying Taylor the opportunity of a personal milestone.

Yet this should not matter. Cricket’s officials are members of an Elite Panel — an oxymoron if they are not aware of the rules. They should be sent home, with a big book, and told not to return until they know it by heart. After the World Cup, obviously.

As the Germans edged towards seven in Belo Horizonte, Jose Mourinho’s mobile telephone began to light up with messages of congratulation. This was the manager, after all, who had secured a fee of £50million from Paris Saint-Germain for David Luiz.

Mourinho’s reply said much about his management philosophy — and why Luiz was never going to last once he had returned to Stamford Bridge.

David Luiz watches on incredulously as the German run riot against Brazil in the World Cup semi-final

Luiz had already been sold by Chelsea to Paris Saint-Germain for £50m before the World Cup capitulation

Luiz is beaten all ends up by Andre Schurrle as the German scores the seventh in Belo Horizonte

Mourinho did not take the opportunity to rubbish Luiz as a footballer or a man. Far from it. He said he was a good technical player, a fine athlete and a brave tackler. His criticism was that Luiz was an optimist. And defenders could never be optimists. Defenders could not play as if all would work out for the best.

Forwards, yes. Forwards had to believe they would score goals, or that every run off the shoulder of the last man was not in vain. But not defenders.

Mourinho wanted miseries at the back. He wanted players who feared the roof was about to fall in, the move was going to break down, a counter attack was only a stray pass away.

David Luiz was too much of an optimist for Jose Mourinho, which meant his Chelsea days were numbered

This helps explain why 'defensive pessimist' John Terry fits Jose Mourinho's mould perfectly

Luiz wasn’t like that. He roamed, he left gaps, he charged upfield and if that break went wrong he thought it wouldn’t matter. He didn’t check for danger, he was rarely alarmed. Luiz was too much of an optimist to defend properly.

This is why, when Paris Saint-Germain line up against Chelsea on Tuesday, Luiz’s place will be occupied by John Terry, whose outstanding defensive skills mark him out as one of life’s worriers. And that is just as Mourinho likes it.

Steven Finn had completed arguably the most meaningless hat-trick in the history of professional cricket. It gave him an equally pointless five-wicket haul. Still, everyone seemed highly delighted.

Finn (right) had gone for 71 off 9.3 overs previously, and Australia’s score of 342 was the highest recorded against England in a World Cup game, yet that was momentarily set aside. It was as if a football team had celebrated an injury time goal, while 7-0 down, all grins and backslapping.

Nobody can argue that Alastair Cook was in the right place to captain England efficiently in this tournament, but Eoin Morgan’s form and potential were greatly overplayed.

Steven Finn is congratulated on his hat-trick but England weren't in the same class as Australia in Melbourne

Finn took five wickets, including that of George Bailey, in the World Cup opener but it was very much in vain

He has now made four ducks in five innings and presided over bowling and fielding every bit as lamentable as any during Cook’s recent tenure.

Morgan put Australia in after winning the toss and there were surprising changes to the order with James Taylor dropped from three to six, Ravi Bopara removed and Gary Ballance called up for his first one-day game since September.

It smacked of a regime in retreat and disarray, and yet still strangely complacent as the reaction to Finn’s late fillip showed. Even Zimbabwe went down to South Africa with more fight than England demonstrated.

Next up are the useful-looking New Zealand and then, a week on Monday, Scotland in Christchurch. It should make for much-needed respite. Then again, that was no doubt how England’s Twenty20 side viewed playing Holland in Chittagong last year.

Mitchell Marsh is jubilant after taking the wicket of England captain Eoin Morgan for another duck

Chelsea owner Roman Abramovich pays the living wage to all club contractors as well as staff

Manchester City have paid the living wage for close to two years. So have Arsenal. West Ham United will begin paying the London living wage from July 1.

What separates most of the Premier League from Chelsea, is that Roman Abramovich is the one owner who pays the living wage to club contractors, too. Good for him.

Yet, equally, why is it Manchester City’s responsibility to subsidise contracted employees? Why should Arsenal make good on the terms and conditions offered by their cleaning and catering partners?

G4S, City’s security contractors, currently pay only 70 per cent of staff the living wage according to their 2014 AGM. G4S is a global company, with 618,000 employees.

CE Facilities, Arsenal’s cleaners, recently had the contract for the Commonwealth Games in Glasgow, yet there was no outcry from politicians over the living wage being paid there.

Delaware North, as the name suggests, is an American-based catering company, with clients ranging from Arsenal and Wembley Stadium to the Niagara Falls State Park.

If parliament is serious about addressing the scandal of the living wage, it needs to go straight to the source, passing legislation that insists all employees are properly rewarded.

It is not enough to grab an easy headline out of football’s new television deal. What of the G4S employees who do not guard the Etihad Stadium, or those who do not flip burgers at the Emirates. Where’s their soundbite?

Still no new contract for Sam Allardyce at West Ham United, and the fans’ reaction to the FA Cup exit at West Bromwich Albion was ferocious.

No matter how happy all sides insist they are with the present arrangement, something is not right.

When a decision on Allardyce is made at the end of the season the cup record may count for more than many think.