No one deserves our sympathy over saga of Rooney's improved pay day

In just a couple of well-rehearsed statements, Wayne Rooney managed to extract from Manchester United exactly what he had failed to get in preliminary discussions simply because he knew he was the man United cannot manage without.

Manchester United without Rooney would be mid-table nobodies at best and that is not a scenario Sir Alex Ferguson, David Gill, or the Glazer family dare consider.

Have no sympathy for Ferguson, for all his dewy-eyed performance when he felt he had been let down by the boy he had wrested from Everton's grasp. Forget, too, the post-settlement claims that all was well again between manager and player, that an apology from Rooney had made up for the aggravation. Ferguson knows he is no longer in charge.

Waste no time crying, either, for Gill's United, whose entire wage structure has been blown apart. They were happy enough, just a couple of years ago, to take 1,000 each from two of my mates for the privilege of travelling from West Yorkshire to Old Trafford at times fixed by TV companies – 3.0 on Saturday afternoon being a rarity – with extra payments for Carling Cup matches taken automatically from the fans' bank account.

But when it came to a Champions League semi-final against Barcelona there were no tickets to be had; the corporate market had taken over, leaving our life-long United fans to watch on TV and regret their investment.

There will similarly be no tears for the Glazers, chancers who took their golden opportunity when United opened their door without discovering exactly who they were welcoming. Without Rooney their cash-cow is dry.

By giving in to Rooney, the Glazers have condemned themselves to years of pain. Everything Rooney wants he will have and when others come along with their demands they, too, will have to be accommodated; even Rooney needs someone to pass the ball to him.

And, least of all, spare not a glimmer of sympathy for the game itself. There has been ample time for the game's administrators to see the danger signs and act accordingly; instead they have closed their eyes and joined the queue at the trough.

If evidence were needed for that sorry position it came in the words of Lee Dixon, once a full-back for Arsenal and now one of the scores of former players making a good living as a pundit.

"Wayne Rooney's decision to sign a new contract did restore a bit of sanity to the world of football," wrote Dixon. "Common sense prevailed."

There you have it; a man good – although not quite so good of late – at kicking a football can demand and get a 100 per cent pay increase; football sanity has been restored, common sense has prevailed. The sad thing is, there are hordes of people who believe such tosh.

THERE were many within the rugby union game – and maybe some in league circles – who scoffed at the remarks of Dr James Robson, the travelling physician with the British Lions in South Africa in the summer of 2009 when he said it was high time the game looked at the way it was heading, particularly in the ever-increasing size and pace of the players and the ramifications of massive "hits" as juggernauts collided.

"Leave us alone, it's a man game," was the response to the good doctor's warning but now, from a totally unexpected source, has come further evidence that the preponderance of power in today's game is indeed taking it down a road which might ultimately lead to disaster.

No lesser body than the National Football League, the most powerful and richest administrative body in the United States, has expressed serious concern at the rise in the number of head injuries being suffered by players, and this in a game where the wearing of helmets is obligatory.

In the NFL fixtures on October 17 six players suffered neck injuries or concussion, thankfully none of them of a serious nature but each one of them ringing out a warning that the game might be held responsible for long-term brain injuries. In a society as litigious as America that is reason enough to pause for thought.

The NFL's response was immediate: "It may be necessary to ban all hits to the head," said official Ray Anderson, promising urgent discussions on the issue. "All things will be on the table," he added. "It is not just a career-threatening situation, it may be life-altering as well."

The loss of sight in one eye suffered by Llanelli's Gavin Quinnell in a recent game provided further evidence that players are in danger when the head is targeted whether by a tackler or a ball-carrier trying to hand-off an opponent.

No one – apart perhaps from the importers of American football equipment – would want to see the use of helmets, complete with face-protecting grids, being made compulsory in rugby but if the Americans are starting to worry then surely we ought to at least be starting the debate over what does and does not constitute a serious risk to players' health.