Manchester City Found Guilty Of Almost All Charges

[BenTheFox]

1 minute ago, AKCJ said:

Again, just so everyone knows...

 

These charges are from 2009 to 2018.

 

We finished above Man City once in this time. We also did not have a single season where finishing one place higher would have led to an increased reward (like Europe or avoiding relegation). The only somewhat viable claim is that we could have had an extra million or so for finishing one place higher.

I'm not someone who is going to cling on to this, as I don't want to sound like one of the KPFC foot soldiers, but you can make a valid case that Manchester City had built a platform for sustained success from 2018 onwards based on breaching financial rules from 2009 until 2018. Also, the charges are from 2009 until 2018 because the investigation started in 2018. It's not unreasonable to suspect that they were still breaking financial regulation post-2018. 

[Trent Steel]

What annoys me the most is their fans are still in denial stating nothings been proved yet and if its proved their owners are dodgy then they will rip up their season tickets...

get a grip

[TheGoldenGod]

15 minutes ago, BenTheFox said:

I'm not someone who is going to cling on to this, as I don't want to sound like one of the KPFC foot soldiers, but you can make a valid case that Manchester City had built a platform for sustained success from 2018 onwards based on breaching financial rules from 2009 until 2018. Also, the charges are from 2009 until 2018 because the investigation started in 2018. It's not unreasonable to suspect that they were still breaking financial regulation post-2018. 

I genuinely thought this was a given....stunned people on here think we don't have a case? I can promise you everyone and their dog is going to demand compensation for this and all will have a case that will need hearing. That's the reality.

[AKCJ]

18 minutes ago, BenTheFox said:

I'm not someone who is going to cling on to this, as I don't want to sound like one of the KPFC foot soldiers, but you can make a valid case that Manchester City had built a platform for sustained success from 2018 onwards based on breaching financial rules from 2009 until 2018. Also, the charges are from 2009 until 2018 because the investigation started in 2018. It's not unreasonable to suspect that they were still breaking financial regulation post-2018. 

Wouldn't disagree with any of that but in terms of these charges it's just conjecture.

[bmt]

2 minutes ago, TheGoldenGod said:

I genuinely thought this was a given....stunned people on here think we don't have a case? I can promise you everyone and their dog is going to demand compensation for this and all will have a case that will need hearing. That's the reality.

Agreed. I think them allowing clubs to sue eachother in these cases and then finding Man City guilty is kind of wild management of this by the Premier League, unless its out of their hands. So many clubs will have compensation demands. Ours (in my opinion quite legitimately) will be so big that theres no way we can be allowed to win.

 

Genuinely think this will lead to the collapse of current status quo (the super league vultures will be circling thats for sure)

[trooky]

1 hour ago, leicesterseddon said:

I agree. Sticking it to the man on PSR is just a displacement activity from our own failure

 

Our level of spending on player wages just a few years ago was completely out of whack and totally unsustainable 

 

Without FFP we would still be in this division, only in an (even) worse financial position than we are 

 

 

I totally disagree with this.

 

The club finished 5th, 5th, 9th and won an FA Cup before we started trying to get our finances under control in 2022 when we realized along with several other similar sized  clubs we would fail the rolling 21/22 season 3 year PSR audit and points deductions would be a real possibility. 

 

Something changed in the PL league at that time, PSR or FFP had been around since 2013 with the same financial rules,  there was never any speculation prior to 21-22 in the media about clubs failing or points deductions. 

 

Everton were in the same situation, equally as badly run at the time but invested in their squad and are still in the PL. 

 

It's all ifs, buts and maybes but Rodgers thought he was getting a squad refresh for 22-23 told players they were leaving etc... 

 

We never invested for that season had several unhappy players who were surpless to the managers requirements who then had to remotivate them and himself. 

 

We had some very good players at the time, with reinforcements we would have stayed in the league with a motivated squad and manager. 

 

The clubs has made many, many bad mistakes ever since then, but the biggest mistake IMO was not rolling the dice investing in that squad and staying in the Premier league. 

 

[Stadt]

If you want us to go after Man City you have to be fine with probably 30+ clubs coming after us.

[trooky]

4 minutes ago, bmt said:

Agreed. I think them allowing clubs to sue eachother in these cases and then finding Man City guilty is kind of wild management of this by the Premier League, unless its out of their hands. So many clubs will have compensation demands. Ours (in my opinion quite legitimately) will be so big that theres no way we can be allowed to win.

 

Genuinely think this will lead to the collapse of current status quo (the super league vultures will be circling thats for sure)

I don't understand why clubs don't sue the Premier league, they've created this whole mess, not administrating the competition or rules fairly or consistently.

 

There is something fundamentally wrong in a competition when Aston Villa having a fire sale having just qualified for the Champions league and Chelsea, Man Utd (last season) and Tottenham can all go on huge spending sprees in the last couple of seasons when they're not in the Champsion league. 

[trooky]

13 minutes ago, Stadt said:

If you want us to go after Man City you have to be fine with probably 30+ clubs coming after us.

Man City have systematically cheated since 2009, They've cooked their books to fastrack the growth of the club and blatently ignored rules and commited fraud. 

 

In 2009 they knowingly falsified books in preparation for entering UEFA competitions which in 2009 agreed to implement FFP for the 2011-12 which permitted owner funding of only 45 mill euros over 2 season. 

 

It's completely different to a PSR failure. 

Edited 8 hours ago by trooky

[Sly]

I fully agree with @Finnegan

 

The rules are broken.

 

Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Tottenham etc, piping up because Manchester spent money like they did (on the face of it) is farcical. 
 

It is a bit like Newcastle have been hamstrung by the stupid rules. 
 

Everyone is trying to compete. 
 

This is the tip of the iceberg, so expect more of this to unravel. Also, if we go after people, so, so many come after us. 
 

When and where does this end? 
 

Football should be decided by 11 v 11 on the pitch.

 

A £100m price tag, doesn’t make you a better player. It’s all perceived propaganda and media hype by the likes of Sky. Either let people spend whatever they want, or put a full auditable salary cap in place if I’m honest. 

 

THE GAME IS WELL AND TRULY GONE AS WE KNOWNIT.
 

The rules are stupid.

 

The game is rigged.

 

The sport has gone soft.

 

VAR is a joke. 

Referring is so inconsistent.

 

Ticket prices are unsustainable.

 

You’ve got football tourists replacing fans.

 

The massive financial disparity between leagues is phenomenal.

 

A single player earning more in a year, than my local village does most likely combined.

 

No respect for referees.

 

Diving, play acting and just overall soft fouls and cheating. Acting like any form of contact is a foul then twats waving imaginary cards around!

 

Fixtures being chopped, changes and re-arranged.

Needing about 5 or 6 legitimate streaming facilities, costing ££££s each month, to watch a game they get in Thailand for about £3 per month.

 

Goalkeepers wasting time pretending to be injured.

 

Players taking an age to the pitch, after rolling out a 3/10 performance. 
 

Possession for possession sake football.

 

No one has any idea what the handball rule

is anymore. 
 

However, let us penalise Manchester City first basically trying to compete with the other corrupt clubs! 

[Stadt]

17 minutes ago, trooky said:

Man City have systematically cheated since 2009, They've cooked their books to fastrack the growth of the club and blatently ignored rules and commited fraud. 

 

In 2009 they knowingly falsified books in preparation for entering UEFA competitions which in 2009 agreed to implement FFP for the 2011-12 which permitted owner funding of only 45 mill euros over 2 season. 

 

It's completely different to a PSR failure. 

We’ve both broken the rules, to different extents, certainly. But if you want to sue clubs for compensation - as Leeds are, you can’t pick and choose what’s valid and what isn’t. It’s Pandora’s box.

 

I think PSR and FFP is a bag of shit and should be scrapped, fed up of the procedural courtroom bullshit. 

[trooky]

26 minutes ago, Stadt said:

We’ve both broken the rules, to different extents, certainly. But if you want to sue clubs for compensation - as Leeds are, you can’t pick and choose what’s valid and what isn’t. It’s Pandora’s box.

 

I think PSR and FFP is a bag of shit and should be scrapped, fed up of the procedural courtroom bullshit. 

The rules are a bag of shit, should never have been introduced and should be scrapped, but I doubt they will because that opens another can of worms. 

 

Yes we've both broken rules along with other clubs, but IMO overspending a sporting spending cap is completely different to breaking the law of the land. 

 

If a company director has done what either Man City or Chelsea have done, ie falsifying accounts or paying bribes to agents they face prison. 

 

IMO the clubs should be going after the league, not club after club. 

Edited 7 hours ago by trooky

[Trav Le Bleu]

29 minutes ago, Sly said:

I fully agree with @Finnegan

 

The rules are broken.

 

Manchester United, Chelsea, Arsenal, Liverpool, Tottenham etc, piping up because Manchester spent money like they did (on the face of it) is farcical. 
 

It is a bit like Newcastle have been hamstrung by the stupid rules. 
 

Everyone is trying to compete. 
 

This is the tip of the iceberg, so expect more of this to unravel. Also, if we go after people, so, so many come after us. 
 

When and where does this end? 
 

Football should be decided by 11 v 11 on the pitch.

 

A £100m price tag, doesn’t make you a better player. It’s all perceived propaganda and media hype by the likes of Sky. Either let people spend whatever they want, or put a full auditable salary cap in place if I’m honest. 

 

THE GAME IS WELL AND TRULY GONE AS WE KNOWNIT.
 

The rules are stupid.

 

The game is rigged.

 

The sport has gone soft.

 

VAR is a joke. 

Referring is so inconsistent.

 

Ticket prices are unsustainable.

 

You’ve got football tourists replacing fans.

 

The massive financial disparity between leagues is phenomenal.

 

A single player earning more in a year, than my local village does most likely combined.

 

No respect for referees.

 

Diving, play acting and just overall soft fouls and cheating. Acting like any form of contact is a foul then twats waving imaginary cards around!

 

Fixtures being chopped, changes and re-arranged.

Needing about 5 or 6 legitimate streaming facilities, costing ££££s each month, to watch a game they get in Thailand for about £3 per month.

 

Goalkeepers wasting time pretending to be injured.

 

Players taking an age to the pitch, after rolling out a 3/10 performance. 
 

Possession for possession sake football.

 

No one has any idea what the handball rule

is anymore. 
 

However, let us penalise Manchester City first basically trying to compete with the other corrupt clubs! 

One word in all of this caught my attention.

 

Sky.

 

It's been a long slow decline from the time when a team's financial success was determined by how many people they could fit into the ground.

 

TV money has killed the game.

[trooky]

1 hour ago, AKCJ said:

Wouldn't disagree with any of that but in terms of these charges it's just conjecture.

It's a different organisation, but City were banned by UEFA from European competitions in February 2020 over the same leak documents from 2018, but reinstated July 2020 by CAS on a technicality. We finished 5th that year. 

 

We don't have the money to sue anyone, but as a fan of Leicester this whole thing boils my piss. 

 

UEFA, the PL, Man City, PSG, Chelsea they're all corrupt as fcuk. 

Edited 7 hours ago by trooky

[AKCJ]

Just now, trooky said:

It's a different organisation, but City were banned by UEFA from European competitions in February 2020 over the same leak documents from 2018, but reinstated July 2020 by CAS on a technicality. We finished 5th that year. 

 

We don't have the money to sue anyone, but as a fan of Leicester this whole thing boils my piss. 

 

UEFA, the PL, Man City, PSG, Chelsea they're all as corrupt as fcuk. 

Yeah again I completely agree with you and the whole thing stinks.

 

But these charges do not affect us directly. 

[MrSpaM]

It honestly would not surprise me at all if Man City's owners decided to start talking to other clubs about the super league again if they get found guilty and the repercussions and sanctions are huge

I know they were one of the clubs to stand against it when it first got announced, but i could see this being the tipping point

 

I also think the premier league are aware this is a possibility as well and might be why they are taking so long to do anything, I can see them shitting themselves and reducing the charges significantly if that's even remotely suggested

[AKCJ]

1 hour ago, MrSpaM said:

It honestly would not surprise me at all if Man City's owners decided to start talking to other clubs about the super league again if they get found guilty and the repercussions and sanctions are huge

I know they were one of the clubs to stand against it when it first got announced, but i could see this being the tipping point

 

I also think the premier league are aware this is a possibility as well and might be why they are taking so long to do anything, I can see them shitting themselves and reducing the charges significantly if that's even remotely suggested

It also wouldn't surprise me if the likes of Liverpool, Arsenal, Man United and Chelsea told them where to go.

[LadyFox53]

It's just another reason to hate football in its current state.

[davieG]

1 hour ago, MrSpaM said:

It honestly would not surprise me at all if Man City's owners decided to start talking to other clubs about the super league again if they get found guilty and the repercussions and sanctions are huge

I know they were one of the clubs to stand against it when it first got announced, but i could see this being the tipping point

 

I also think the premier league are aware this is a possibility as well and might be why they are taking so long to do anything, I can see them shitting themselves and reducing the charges significantly if that's even remotely suggested

THe Super League was to replace the European (UEFA) competitions they never intended to leave the PL so I don't see how that helps in this situation.

[Corky]

6 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

I've said it a bunch of times. I just don't really feel any anger for what Man City have done. I couldn't give a **** about their 115 charges. 

 

If it does genuinely surface in the coming weeks and months as all the details come out that they truly have spent vastly, vastly more than any of the other big six clubs could ever dream of then I'd feel differently. 

 

When Sarries got done in rugby I was delighted. They were blatantly and openly cheating, they were spending way beyond what anyone else was and it was just making a rigged and unfair system. 

 

But in football the system is already rigged and unfair. United, Arsenal and Liverpool are all allowed to spend what Man City have because of commercial revenue that has nothing to do with success. 

 

It's dumb. Massively dumb. Being angry about Man City but just shrugging and accepting that it's OK for Liverpool to spend over 100m on players over and over and not be angry about that is wild. 

 

These clubs have spent over 40 years trying in different forms to cut off the rest. The taking away of the sharing of gate receipts, the original TV deal for the Premier League (the big clubs preferred ITV because they would have shown more of their matches), Project Big Picture, the European Super League and then the writing of financial rules that mostly benefits them. And any punishment will no doubt be weighted in their favour over others.

 

If this case provided a proper reset where spending was curbed to more sustainable levels or it was judged on football revenue then I would be fully behind it but no, carry on buying players then selling car parks to balance books. The lesser clubs aren't just trying to catch Man City.

[foxfanazer]

6 hours ago, Finnegan said:

 

I've said it a bunch of times. I just don't really feel any anger for what Man City have done. I couldn't give a **** about their 115 charges. 

 

If it does genuinely surface in the coming weeks and months as all the details come out that they truly have spent vastly, vastly more than any of the other big six clubs could ever dream of then I'd feel differently. 

 

When Sarries got done in rugby I was delighted. They were blatantly and openly cheating, they were spending way beyond what anyone else was and it was just making a rigged and unfair system. 

 

But in football the system is already rigged and unfair. United, Arsenal and Liverpool are all allowed to spend what Man City have because of commercial revenue that has nothing to do with success. 

 

It's dumb. Massively dumb. Being angry about Man City but just shrugging and accepting that it's OK for Liverpool to spend over 100m on players over and over and not be angry about that is wild. 

 

Feel the same. A load of faux outrage over nothing 

[lfu]

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4727779/premier-league-statement-manchester-city-fc

Premier League Statement: Manchester City FC

29 Sep 2026

An independent Commission has found Manchester City FC guilty of all charges related to serious breaches of the Premier League’s financial rules over a nine-season period, and the majority of charges in relation to its failure to co-operate with the League’s investigation.

The independent Commission found that between Seasons 2009/10 and 2017/18:
- Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ contracts (which misrepresented the true agreement between the parties) with a number of its commercial partners, as well as relying on ‘sham’ agreements with others, to artificially inflate the club’s revenues and reduce its costs
- The club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators
- Manchester City was significantly in breach of both the Premier League’s and UEFA’s spending limits
- During the Premier League’s investigation, Manchester City committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League (three of the four alleged breaches were upheld)

The independent Commission found that Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ commercial deals with a number of its sponsors during the period, which were part of a disguised funding scheme, whereby those companies were only required to pay a portion of the relevant sponsorship fees. The remainder was funded by Abu Dhabi United Group Investment & Development Ltd (ADUG), which owned the club. As part of the scheme, further ‘sham’ arrangements, funded by ADUG, were entered into to enable the club to record lower operating expenses than it actually incurred, as well as a ‘sham’ circular arrangement with Fordham, an entity that purchased the club’s players’ image rights, that was funded by ADUG.

The purpose of these schemes was found to have been to artificially inflate the club’s revenues, and reduce its costs, by more than £900 million during the affected period, to appear to comply with financial rules. The consequence of this, as the Commission found, was that the club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators. The Commission concluded that ‘by its conduct the club clearly intended to circumvent the PL Rules‘.

As a result, Manchester City failed to accurately report its income and expenditure for the purposes of the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules and UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Rules. The Commission found that, had all of the relevant agreements been reported accurately in the club’s accounts, it would have been in breach of both the League’s and UEFA’s spending limits by a very substantial amount.

In addition, during the course of the four-year investigation conducted by the Premier League, the club committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League. The Commission concluded that the club had ‘made concerted efforts to stop and frustrate the PL investigation’.

Richard Masters, Chief Executive of the Premier League, said: “The core decision establishes the facts of what happened at Manchester City during this period. It details how the club systematically broke Premier League Rules for nearly a decade.

“It also vindicates the Premier League’s decision to pursue this case against Manchester City.  While the process to date has been both long and difficult, the League has remained determined that the facts be established independently.

“It is a key responsibility of the Premier League to ensure that the Rules, approved by the clubs themselves, are upheld to protect the integrity of the competition. It is paramount that the League remains competitive and fair for all clubs and for the fans. We take that role extremely seriously.

“This disciplinary case, and this decision, are the most significant in Premier League history. There are elements of the case that remain to be decided, including, importantly, what sanction must follow for these breaches. Now we have the Commission’s decision, we are committed to moving swiftly through the remainder of the process, to provide certainty for the League, our clubs and fans.”

The independent Commission’s findings are set out in a Core Decision, of which a redacted version has been published (click here). The Commission’s award comprises both the Core Decision and a large number of additional appendices, which the League is committed to publishing as soon as it is able.

The League is able to publish the Core Decision because the Commission has ruled (and an Appeal Board has confirmed) that the Commission’s decision is a ‘final award’.

Now that the charges have been proved, the issue of sanction will be addressed separately in a further hearing with the independent Commission. In accordance with Premier League rules, that hearing will remain private and confidential until such a time as publication of the outcome is permitted.

The club has the right to appeal the independent Commission’s findings and has until Friday 2 October to exercise that right.

The Premier League Board’s intention is that the full process (including any appeals and publication of relevant decisions) is concluded as soon as possible.

Notes to Editors

Premier League investigation, independent Commission process:

- The Premier League began its investigation into Manchester City in December 2018, and a complaint was subsequently issued under Section W of the League’s rules in February 2023
- The independent Commission held a 42-day hearing, which concluded in December 2024
- In explaining the length of time it had taken to provide the parties with a decision, the independent Commission wrote: ‘It has taken us much longer than we would have wished, and much longer than we had anticipated would be the case when the hearing concluded, to produce our Decision. That is regrettable. 

‘However, we were fortunate to have available to us throughout the period in which our Decision has been being prepared not only all of the documents that were used at the hearing but also

(a) verbatim transcripts of the evidence given by each witness and expert at the hearing. Those transcripts ran to approximately 7,000 pages, and (b) extremely detailed written submissions from the parties (that they had supplemented orally over four days at the end of the hearing) on the evidence and each of the numerous issues that we were tasked with determining in the proceedings.’

Premier League investigations, independent Commissions, and Appeal Boards

- The Premier League Board has the power to investigate any suspected or alleged breach of Premier League Rules
- Where, following the conclusion of an investigation or otherwise, the Board believes that there is a suspicion or allegation of a Rule breach, it has a number of options available to it. One of these options is to issue a written complaint and refer the matter to a Commission
- The League has established an independent Judicial Panel, comprising a number of legal, financial and other experts
- Members of the Judicial Panel are appointed by its independent Chair. It is also the Chair of the Judicial Panel who selects members of the Judicial Panel to sit on Commissions, which are independent of the Premier League. The Chair of the Judicial Panel at the time of the Complaint in these proceedings was Murray Rosen KC. The current Chair of the Judicial Panel is Sir Gary Hickinbottom
- All proceedings convened under Section W of the Rules are confidential and heard in private
- The Commission appointed under Section W of the Rules has a broad discretion as to the sanctions it wishes to apply, the non-exhaustive list set out in rules includes fines, points deductions and other sporting sanctions
- Whenever a Commission makes what is described as a ‘final award’ in the rules, such decisions are published on the Premier League website
- A party to proceedings that wishes to challenge a decision of the Commission may do so under Section W of the Premier League Rules, by filing an appeal to be heard before an Appeal Board
- Appeal Boards are also appointed by the Chair of the Judicial Panel and must have three members, one of whom should have held judicial office, and would sit as the chair of the Appeal Board
- An Appeal Board has wide discretion in respect of the appeal, and may allow it, dismiss it, or make any other order that it thinks fit (including varying the order of Commission)

For further information on the disciplinary process, please see Section W of the Premier League Handbook.

Confidentiality

- The disciplinary proceedings between the Premier League and the club have been confidential, as provided for in the League’s Rules
- Premier League Rules provide for the publication of the outcomes of final awards of Commissions
- It has recently been determined that certain aspects about the findings of the Commission in these proceedings may be published under the League’s Rules.
- At this stage, the Premier League is only permitted to publish a redacted version of the summary of the Commission’s ‘core findings’
- The process remains ongoing and any further information related to the proceedings that has not been published by the Premier League remains confidential. When the Premier League is able to do so under the League’s Rules – unless legally prevented from doing so - the Premier League will publish the full Decision and any further updates. In the meantime, all aspects of the ongoing process will be confidential

Edited 2 hours ago by lfu

[MPH]

3 minutes ago, lfu said:

https://www.premierleague.com/en/news/4727779/premier-league-statement-manchester-city-fc

Premier League Statement: Manchester City FC

29 Sep 2026

An independent Commission has found Manchester City FC guilty of all charges related to serious breaches of the Premier League’s financial rules over a nine-season period, and the majority of charges in relation to its failure to co-operate with the League’s investigation.

The independent Commission found that between Seasons 2009/10 and 2017/18:
- Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ contracts (which misrepresented the true agreement between the parties) with a number of its commercial partners, as well as relying on ‘sham’ agreements with others, to artificially inflate the club’s revenues and reduce its costs
- The club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators
- Manchester City was significantly in breach of both the Premier League’s and UEFA’s spending limits
- During the Premier League’s investigation, Manchester City committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League (three of the four alleged breaches were upheld)

The independent Commission found that Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ commercial deals with a number of its sponsors during the period, which were part of a disguised funding scheme, whereby those companies were only required to pay a portion of the relevant sponsorship fees. The remainder was funded by Abu Dhabi United Group Investment & Development Ltd (ADUG), which owned the club. As part of the scheme, further ‘sham’ arrangements, funded by ADUG, were entered into to enable the club to record lower operating expenses than it actually incurred, as well as a ‘sham’ circular arrangement with Fordham, an entity that purchased the club’s players’ image rights, that was funded by ADUG.

The purpose of these schemes was found to have been to artificially inflate the club’s revenues, and reduce its costs, by more than £900 million during the affected period, to appear to comply with financial rules. The consequence of this, as the Commission found, was that the club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators. The Commission concluded that ‘by its conduct the club clearly intended to circumvent the PL Rules‘.

As a result, Manchester City failed to accurately report its income and expenditure for the purposes of the Premier League’s Profitability and Sustainability Rules and UEFA’s Club Licensing and Financial Fair Play Rules. The Commission found that, had all of the relevant agreements been reported accurately in the club’s accounts, it would have been in breach of both the League’s and UEFA’s spending limits by a very substantial amount.

In addition, during the course of the four-year investigation conducted by the Premier League, the club committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League. The Commission concluded that the club had ‘made concerted efforts to stop and frustrate the PL investigation’.

Richard Masters, Chief Executive of the Premier League, said: “The core decision establishes the facts of what happened at Manchester City during this period. It details how the club systematically broke Premier League Rules for nearly a decade.

“It also vindicates the Premier League’s decision to pursue this case against Manchester City.  While the process to date has been both long and difficult, the League has remained determined that the facts be established independently.

“It is a key responsibility of the Premier League to ensure that the Rules, approved by the clubs themselves, are upheld to protect the integrity of the competition. It is paramount that the League remains competitive and fair for all clubs and for the fans. We take that role extremely seriously.

“This disciplinary case, and this decision, are the most significant in Premier League history. There are elements of the case that remain to be decided, including, importantly, what sanction must follow for these breaches. Now we have the Commission’s decision, we are committed to moving swiftly through the remainder of the process, to provide certainty for the League, our clubs and fans.”

The independent Commission’s findings are set out in a Core Decision, of which a redacted version has been published (click here). The Commission’s award comprises both the Core Decision and a large number of additional appendices, which the League is committed to publishing as soon as it is able.

The League is able to publish the Core Decision because the Commission has ruled (and an Appeal Board has confirmed) that the Commission’s decision is a ‘final award’.

Now that the charges have been proved, the issue of sanction will be addressed separately in a further hearing with the independent Commission. In accordance with Premier League rules, that hearing will remain private and confidential until such a time as publication of the outcome is permitted.

The club has the right to appeal the independent Commission’s findings and has until Friday 2 October to exercise that right.

The Premier League Board’s intention is that the full process (including any appeals and publication of relevant decisions) is concluded as soon as possible.

Notes to Editors

Premier League investigation, independent Commission process:

- The Premier League began its investigation into Manchester City in December 2018, and a complaint was subsequently issued under Section W of the League’s rules in February 2023
- The independent Commission held a 42-day hearing, which concluded in December 2024
- In explaining the length of time it had taken to provide the parties with a decision, the independent Commission wrote: ‘It has taken us much longer than we would have wished, and much longer than we had anticipated would be the case when the hearing concluded, to produce our Decision. That is regrettable. 

‘However, we were fortunate to have available to us throughout the period in which our Decision has been being prepared not only all of the documents that were used at the hearing but also

(a) verbatim transcripts of the evidence given by each witness and expert at the hearing. Those transcripts ran to approximately 7,000 pages, and (b) extremely detailed written submissions from the parties (that they had supplemented orally over four days at the end of the hearing) on the evidence and each of the numerous issues that we were tasked with determining in the proceedings.’

Premier League investigations, independent Commissions, and Appeal Boards

- The Premier League Board has the power to investigate any suspected or alleged breach of Premier League Rules
- Where, following the conclusion of an investigation or otherwise, the Board believes that there is a suspicion or allegation of a Rule breach, it has a number of options available to it. One of these options is to issue a written complaint and refer the matter to a Commission
- The League has established an independent Judicial Panel, comprising a number of legal, financial and other experts
- Members of the Judicial Panel are appointed by its independent Chair. It is also the Chair of the Judicial Panel who selects members of the Judicial Panel to sit on Commissions, which are independent of the Premier League. The Chair of the Judicial Panel at the time of the Complaint in these proceedings was Murray Rosen KC. The current Chair of the Judicial Panel is Sir Gary Hickinbottom
- All proceedings convened under Section W of the Rules are confidential and heard in private
- The Commission appointed under Section W of the Rules has a broad discretion as to the sanctions it wishes to apply, the non-exhaustive list set out in rules includes fines, points deductions and other sporting sanctions
- Whenever a Commission makes what is described as a ‘final award’ in the rules, such decisions are published on the Premier League website
- A party to proceedings that wishes to challenge a decision of the Commission may do so under Section W of the Premier League Rules, by filing an appeal to be heard before an Appeal Board
- Appeal Boards are also appointed by the Chair of the Judicial Panel and must have three members, one of whom should have held judicial office, and would sit as the chair of the Appeal Board
- An Appeal Board has wide discretion in respect of the appeal, and may allow it, dismiss it, or make any other order that it thinks fit (including varying the order of Commission)

For further information on the disciplinary process, please see Section W of the Premier League Handbook.

Confidentiality

- The disciplinary proceedings between the Premier League and the club have been confidential, as provided for in the League’s Rules
- Premier League Rules provide for the publication of the outcomes of final awards of Commissions
- It has recently been determined that certain aspects about the findings of the Commission in these proceedings may be published under the League’s Rules.
- At this stage, the Premier League is only permitted to publish a redacted version of the summary of the Commission’s ‘core findings’
- The process remains ongoing and any further information related to the proceedings that has not been published by the Premier League remains confidential. When the Premier League is able to do so under the League’s Rules – unless legally prevented from doing so - the Premier League will publish the full Decision and any further updates. In the meantime, all aspects of the ongoing process will be confidential

 

if this is all true, then a  hefty punishment is the only justifiable outcome .

[StanSP]

Several points to be deducted as I think these were similar breaches to ourselves and other clubs? 

 

The independent Commission found that between Seasons 2009/10 and 2017/18:
- Manchester City arranged ‘sham’ contracts (which misrepresented the true agreement between the parties) with a number of its commercial partners, as well as relying on ‘sham’ agreements with others, to artificially inflate the club’s revenues and reduce its costs
- The club filed misstated accounts and concealed the true state of its finances from its auditors and football regulators
- Manchester City was significantly in breach of both the Premier League’s and UEFA’s spending limits
- During the Premier League’s investigation, Manchester City committed multiple breaches of its duties of co-operation and utmost good faith towards the League (three of the four alleged breaches were upheld)

 

 

[Corky]

Next year's Oasis Tour now a fundraising mission.