LAST season, midfielder Tom Lowery was directly involved in 20 per cent of all the goals Crewe Alex scored in League One.

He also delivered three goals and eight assists. But in this campaign, only Doncaster have scored less goals than Crewe and before last Saturday's defeat, Fleetwood had not kept a clean sheet all season.

Of course, there is more to this than just Lowery's exclusion; half of the first XI from last season now play elsewhere. However, the decision to leave one of our best players in the stands becomes more self-defeating with each passing match while the club languish 23rd in League One.

Crewe manager Dave Artell has said Lowery will not play again until he signs a new contract. Yet this ignores the fact that the likes of Ryan Wintle and Perry Ng were virtually ever present during the last year of their deals.

Artell had a ready-made replacement for Wintle in Luke Murphy, but he also knew Wintle was too good to drop. Why is it suddenly different for Lowery? Is this how we are going to treat our players?

I should stress that I have no issue with the club not agreeing to demands made by Lowery's agent in regard to his release clause, but while he is under contract, he is being paid to play football for Crewe Alexandra.

In exiling the 23-year-old, Artell is trying to solve the wrong problem. If Crewe's manager does want to stop our best young players moving for free when they turn 24, then English football itself will need to be reformed.

In the last season before the Premier League's inception in 1991/2, over 60 per cent of transfer money spent in the English game went into the Football League.

In contrast, by the 2018/19 season, 67 per cent of money spent went overseas, seven times more than the amount spent on players from the football pyramid.

Historically, Crewe's best players have been sold before they reach 24, the age at which they can leave for free. Yet this is becoming increasingly less frequent, simply because clubs higher up the food chain are preferring to buy cheap imports from abroad instead.

In addition, the rules governing the recruitment and development of young players, driven by the introduction of the Elite Player Performance Plan (EPPP), has led to Football League clubs having a weaker talent pipeline than previously, which in turn reduces the interest and fees generated by those players.

This is largely due to the requirement for a set number of homegrown players in Premier League and European squads, which further incentivises the top teams to scour the country and hoard the best young English players.

The result is that Premier League clubs now have more players than they will ever need, which removes talent from the market, and in turn, opportunities for other, smaller clubs like Crewe to make a profit.

This desire to sweep up all the available talent has also fuelled the loan market, which has now become a business in itself.

Chelsea had 37 players out on loan in 2017 and in the summer of 2021, were able to sell youth players deemed surplus to requirements for almost £90m. In 2019, Italian outfit Atlanta had a staggering 76 players out on loan.

If you combine the issues created by EPPP with an influx of cheap foreign players, it has the effect of reducing the flow of money through the English pyramid. The odds are now stacked against clubs like Crewe, who want to nurture and develop their own players - the best talent has already been hoovered up, and the ones that are left struggle to command huge fees.

This situation is not Artell's fault, or Lowery's, and the solution to it is not exiling players in the last year of their contracts.

If Crewe's business model is under threat, then it is worth looking further afield than a 5 ft 6 midfielder from Holmes Chapel. Lowery does not owe Crewe anything; he has played over 100 games for the club and helped win promotion from League Two. He will have paid his due.

The current situation benefits no one: not the fans, not Artell - and unless some magic reform takes place in English football - it is not going to benefit the club either. Crewe may be relegated this season whether Lowery plays or not, but they are a better team with him in it.

The numbers if Crewe do get relegated are stark: In the second Inside Crewe magazine Chairman Charles Grant said, "If this club is in League Two it loses a lot of money and that's up to the directors to support the club and deal with it. If we are in League One, we get somewhere close to breaking even".

The numbers support this: by my calculations, since 1986, in the fourteen seasons Crewe have spent in League Two, only four of those turned a profit. By comparison, the club have made a profit in seven of 13 seasons in League One. If Lowery does help to keep Crewe in the division, the financial rewards are obvious.

Grant now sits on the EFL's Salary Cap Management Group and is also an alternate director on the EFL's Board of Directors which could prove to be pivotal. There is a need to incentivise clubs to bring through their own players and ensure they are properly compensated for that investment.

Artell has done a bloody good job; but he has got this one wrong. In what is going to be an incredibly challenging season, you need your best players available and everyone pulling in the same direction.

It is time for Artell and Lowery to sit down and make up before it is too late.