Given football's propensity for conflict and controversy, the answer is reasonably high. Lord Brian Mawhinney has some 2,000 toilets to hide in if he wishes to avoid Ken Bates, but the two figureheads will no doubt be prepared for that awkward meeting.

Wembley, with a circumference of one kilometre, is not necessarily big enough for the both of them.

Mawhinney may have nothing to say, vindicated as he felt by the recent arbitration ruling supporting the decision of the Football League to deduct 15 points from Leeds United.

Bates, in contrast, has more to say than he could possibly transmit in one short conversation.

But, if United's owner has any sense, he will leave Mawhinney to his own devices this weekend.


The Football League's punitive hand has shaped United's season and it is entirely because of their rules and regulations that Leeds have been forced to gamble nine months of extreme exertion on an unpredictable game against a talented Doncaster Rovers team.

The influence of the League seems as acute now as it did in August, but the fact remains that the 15-point deduction has not been fatal.

United are one creditable performance away from rendering it irrelevant.

If redemption is attained in London on Sunday, the only matter worthy of attention will be the club's unprecedented achievement of reaching the Championship in a season when they should have been also-rans. Mawhinney's presence and the role of the Football League has no business muddying the waters.

It is perhaps an example of how unwilling United are to allow their treatment by the League to dominate the agenda that the issue of their penalty has been discussed infrequently since the club's appeal against the punishment was turned away by the arbitration panel on May 1.

The conflict has been all-consuming at stages of this season, and as disappointing as the failure of arbitration was, there was satisfaction to be gained from the fact that Gary McAllister and his players would no longer be asked to share newspaper headlines with a drawn-out, backroom battle which did little for the credibility of League One and less still for proper appreciation of the progress that Leeds were making.

Last month's visit to Millwall epitomised the distraction that United were forced to accept during a pressurised period of the term when their nerve held brilliantly.

The 2-0 victory at the New Den was as resilient and opportunistic a performance as Leeds had produced since August, but it was almost lost in the intense chatter surrounding an appeal hearing that was due to conclude two days later.

Arbitration was the dominant topic of conversation, and the first subject tossed at McAllister in every press conference he staged.
When United's manager suggested that his players had received a fraction of the credit they truly deserved, he was absolutely right.

In effect, the thought that the lost 15 points might be suddenly returned encouraged the public to take United's results for granted.

In the month of April, when six matches brought five victories and four away from home, the division of public focus between sporting achievement and legal arguments did no justice to McAllister or his squad.

Jonathan Howson – by now, the city of Leeds' local hero – made a revealing comment when discussing United's deduction this week.
"If you could have written it, you'd have said 'keep your 15 points and we'll get promoted anyway'," he said. "It's still possible."

I don't doubt that the majority of his team-mates feel exactly the same. Had automatic promotion been handed to Leeds late in the day by arbitration, McAllister's squad would be spread across the beaches of Europe now, free from the strain that will fall on them on Sunday.

But would they have departed England with due acknowledgement from the country at large, or would they have left behind an unseemly squabble involving several other clubs and the Football League?

Common sense points to the latter eventuality, if the threat made by Doncaster Rovers to challenge a ruling in United's favour was as serious as it sounded. Legality in the foreground, and the success of a spirited squad hidden from view; so it has been too often this season.

There is no disputing that Leeds, as a football team, were worth automatic promotion.

Certain individuals argued that their form would not have been so potent without the motivation of their 15-point deduction, but that opinion is plain conjecture. Statistics, on the other hand, stand up to scrutiny.

United were the second-most consistent team in League One – by a street – and their campaign has been an unmitigated triumph.

McAllister declines to take credit for any of it, but a number of the club's most convincing performances have come on his watch.

Their most effective signing – Dougie Freedman – was made by him. He is part of a cast of thousands who have been responsible in some way for United's success. It is far quicker to list those who aren't.

McAllister, it should be remembered, has rarely been able to view automatic promotion as a serious aim.

There is, therefore, no chance whatsoever that he would rather have sand between his toes than the turf of Wembley beneath his feet.

Wembley was where he wanted to be. It is, in the end, only through the play-off final that Leeds can expect to be showered with the praise they deserve. Perhaps, as Howson believes, their involvement in Sunday's fixture was written.

By rights, the club should never have been in this position. The 15-point penalty ought to have crippled them.

But tempting though it is to see Sunday's game as a chance to spite the Football League, there are healthier sources of inspiration. C

hief among them is the opportunity to begin United's revival, and for McAllister's squad to be all they can be.

No set of players deserves it more.