Who'll buy Lee Bowyer? Good question. The obvious answer, in other circumstances, would be Leeds United. Where else would Bowyer's blend of pit-bull aggression and natural football intelligence be more at home? A pity he's not available, or so you can imagine David O'Leary lamenting.

Of course, the whole business of putting Bowyer on the transfer list only four days after the end of the proceedings in Hull crown court might be a gigantic bluff on the club's behalf. They may be hoping that the shock will provoke him into backing down and accepting the imposition of a fine of four weeks' wages and a continuous programme of community service work.

The hand of David O'Leary, it must be said, is not immediately apparent in the decision to sanction a player who left the court on Friday having been pronounced not guilty on all charges. It was O'Leary who, in one of the Sunday tabloids, spoke in the warmest possible terms of Bowyer's gesture in presenting the manager with his shirt - suitably autographed - at the end of last season, something the recipient described as "an incredibly touching gesture".

O'Leary went on to lavish praise on the player, describing Bowyer's attitude to his involvement in the case as "unbelievable" - an assessment with which the judge clearly agreed, since he refused to award the player legal costs on the grounds that he lied so thoroughly in his statements to the police.

But that was not really what O'Leary meant. The message he intended to convey was that, in the two years since the incident occurred, Bowyer had continued to play for the club in a manner suggesting that nothing untoward had taken place. A football manager can ask for nothing more. "His performances have shown him to be a wonderfully gifted player," O'Leary said, "and his character has shown him to be a remarkable young man."

So it was hardly likely to have been his decision to fine Bowyer and to order him to join Woodgate in performing community service, on the grounds that, while not guilty of a charge of affray, he had nevertheless breached the club's disciplinary code by wandering the lanes of central Leeds while under the influence of drink.

Quite clearly the punishment was ordered by Peter Ridsdale, the club's chairman, who had looked uncomfortable on Friday afternoon when trying to explain why Leeds would have sacked a player found guilty of GBH but were prepared to retain one guilty merely of participating in an affray in which a student came under life-threatening assault.

Two days later, Ridsdale was also smarting under the torrent of criticism unleashed by the appearance of extracts from O'Leary's forthcoming book in the News of the World on Sunday. Some of O'Leary's statements, including his appraisal of Bowyer's character, were greeted with widespread disgust.

The chairman may well have already intended to impose the sanctions, but the reaction to O'Leary's folly must surely have hardened his resolve to be seen to be taking rigorous measures on behalf of the club.

Under an agreement with the Professional Footballers' Association, the maximum fine the clubs can impose on a player is two weeks' wages. For a fine to exceed that amount, the player must give his assent, which is what Jonathan Woodgate has done. Found guilty of affray, and therefore not in a position to dispute the matter, Woodgate has agreed to a fine of eight weeks' wages, apparently asking only that the money should be put towards the club's work in the community. A good move all round, in terms of both justice and public relations.

Bowyer, however, has spent the best part of two years defending his innocence. Since he succeeded, at least to the jury's satisfaction, he must have been surprised by the desire of a previously supportive club to inflict punishment rather than just to pat him on the back and send him out to help Leeds' push for the title and to win a place in Sven-Goran Eriksson's World Cup squad. And, as is his right, he refused to accept it.

He may also have been advised that to agree to pay the fine would have been tantamount to accepting a measure of guilt - a potentially dangerous course, in the light of the possibility that Sarfraz Najeib, the victim of the assault, may yet bring a civil action for damages.

Ridsdale has told O'Leary that he cannot pick Bowyer. As far as selection for the England team is concerned, the Football Association was planning to make a statement in the coming days clarifying the policy towards both Leeds players. In terms of pure principle, yesterday's events should have no bearing on Eriksson's room for manoeuvre. Practically speaking, however, Bowyer's stand may have ruled him out of contention for a place in next summer's squad, and thus spared the England management an awkward decision.

We shall see, over the coming days, whether either side in this dispute is playing a high-stakes game of bluff. No doubt Ridsdale would be best pleased by a scenario in which no club came in with a bid for Bowyer, who might then be forced to climb down and take his medicine.

But while it may be hard to imagine Manchester United, Liverpool or Arsenal showing an interest, there will be other, needier clubs anxious to invest in a highly combative midfield player who can score goals. And who, in such a scenario, would be rather keen to make a point.