What next: Should the Premier League give up, play on until September or play three games a day?

The season was originally put on hold until April, but with the country on a restrictive lockdown, pubs shut and no mass gatherings permitted, there seems no clear route back to holding one Premier League game again, let alone finishing off the whole season.

There have been a number of ideas discussed in the media, and others which have been rumoured behind closed doors. None are yet to be totally dismissed, but there appears to be no clear and practical favourite. There is not an obvious consensus forming amongst England’s biggest leagues.

Sheffield United manager Chris Wilders aid on Thursday that he thinks the current football season can be completed, explaining that this season should take precedent future competitions.

Speaking on the BBC's Today programme, the Blades boss said: "I think for the integrity of the competition and competitions, especially the top end of English football and European football, they'll want to finish the season.

"I believe that there will be an ability next year to adjust, with international breaks, with moving a few games into midweek, and extending the season into next season, that we can and we have that ability through organisation and planning, to finish this season off."

What are the options under consideration?

This was one of the earliest suggestions once it became apparent that there would be no speedy return to normality for the country. What it entails - as the hazy details are understood - would be two camps set up for all the clubs across the country. One would be located in the midlands, and the other in or around London, despite those areas both being hotspots for coronavirus outbreaks. From there, three games a day would be held and broadcasted until the league was played out.

Both of these camps would require strict access, and it would be clear that few additional staff would be allowed into the camps or the stadia. Indeed, it was suggested that games would go ahead on training pitches rather than in Premier League grounds, in order to reduce the risk to an already restricted amount of attendees.

One consideration is whether there is enough testing available to keep people safe, as is the amount of capacity in the NHS to deal with injuries and any potential outbreaks that may emerge from the competition. While it is not ridiculous to imagine such a thing going ahead, it would be a logistical conundrum. Nevertheless, the idea is believed to have support from the government as a fillip to the nation’s morale, so it may be given resources to be completed.

Another more understandable option is to allow the infection to properly recede, and then pick up where we left off. That could take months, and indeed without excellent treatment and/or a vaccine, it might be the case that simply waiting it out could take the best part of two years. To that end, it is currently unlikely that grounds will be full of spectators any time soon.

However, there is a little wriggle room for this to happen. Assuming the first wave is the worst, the start of next season can be pushed back, and Euro 2020 has absented itself from the schedule to make sure there is still just about enough time to get the season completed by September if it starts in July.

The wrinkle here is that broadcasters could demand hundreds of millions of pounds in compensation due to a failure to comply with the contractual arrangements between the league and media companies. It is not a dead end, though.

If the broadcasters were to enforce that payout, it would necessarily affect the amount of money that clubs could spend on transfers next season, which could affect the quality of the football on offer next season. As a result, it has been suggested that in lieu of a refund, the league could offer up more games for broadcast next season in order for everyone to be properly compensated.

Sunday Times journalist Jonathan Northcroft suggested that it may meet the contractual requirements to finish by June 30 to play up to 29 games. That would mean that teams could play just two more games each and allow Liverpool the chance to claim their title.

In addition to giving finality to who wins the title, there are other benefits. If the theory holds, then Europa League and Champions League places could be settled, as could the question of relegation. However, given the money at stake over every league place, not only those that condemn a team to relegation, there could be an almighty legal scrap over the justification for ending the season prematurely.

The nuclear option is simply assessing the options in front of the Premier League and casting aside action as an option. To embrace nothing as the finest possibility. To locate oblivion.

The chances of this seem slim for now. The price of failing to deliver a broadcastable product is such a huge payout that it is inconceivable to so many parties to jack everything in.

Nevertheless, the option has to be considered in order to prepare for the implications. If clubs no longer receive ticket sales, and if they have to write-off their television deals, then transfer deals will have to be abandoned. Existing payments may not be fulfilled, players could see their contracts torn up, and financial strife could be endemic in football. There could be a collapse of the football pyramid which nobody spared. While everyone is working to avoid this outcome, it needs to be acknowledged as a possibility.