Jamie Carragher, the former Liverpool defender turned Sky Sports pundit, has openly argued that Manchester City should have all the trophies they collected during the period in which they have been adjudged guilty of serious financial rule breaches stripped away, and that the club’s owners ought to be removed from their positions of authority. An independent commission tasked with investigating Premier League financial compliance concluded that City breached the league’s rules on multiple counts, finding the club guilty of every charge brought against it. Despite the damning verdict, the club continues to deny any wrongdoing. Chief executive Ferran Soriano dismissed the investigation as a "Premier League conspiracy theory" in a video addressed to players and staff, and the organisation has announced its intention to appeal the decision, with a deadline of 2 October to lodge its challenge.
The period under scrutiny stretches from the 2009‑10 campaign through to the 2017‑18 season, a span in which Manchester City amassed a remarkable haul of silverware: three Premier League crowns, one FA Cup, three League Cups and a Community Shield. Carragher believes that these honours should be expunged from the club’s record. "I do think Manchester City's titles they've won in this time, or trophies, should be taken off their list," he told Sky Sports.
He stopped short of saying that the trophies should automatically be awarded to the runners‑up in each competition, noting that the primary injustice lies in the emotional experience of victory that was robbed from the players, clubs and supporters involved. "Whether other clubs should get them is slightly different," Carragher explained.
"But what Manchester City have done is, they've not just hurt their own players in terms of no one looks at their trophies and medals now in the same way…" Carragher reflected on the personal significance of winning medals, recalling how a single whistle can trigger a rush of adrenaline and pride that lingers long after the physical award is stored away. "I've been very lucky to win a few medals. I never look at the medal years later. But my mind goes back to a moment, I get a feeling in my stomach.
I remember the referee blowing a final whistle of a big game. Those players will never get that feeling and it was robbed by Manchester City.
That's what they haven't got. I don't think any player will care if you go and give them a medal, and he puts it in the house, in his trophy room, he'll never look at it. It's not about medals, it's about feelings, and that's what Manchester City have robbed." Beyond the loss of trophies, Carragher insists that the owners must also face consequences.
He argues that the individuals at the top of the organisation bear ultimate responsibility for the misconduct. "The club are going to get punished," he said.
"You've got supporters, players, the club and owners. For me this is all about the owners, the people who are at the top of the club." He praised Manchester City’s historical stature, noting that the club has been a prominent institution for a century and will likely remain so for many more.
However, he questioned whether the current owners can continue to operate within English football after the scandal. "We talk about a fit and proper test for owners. What they've done for 10 years – and left this stain that will be there for the next 10 years – it starts because they don't like the word no. When you see the statements – the one from [CEO Ferran] Soriano last night – it's beggars belief what you're hearing.
They have so much power and finance behind them, nobody ever tells them no. Until they move away from the club, I don't know how this stain is removed from the club." Carragher acknowledged that City will likely rebuild and field competitive squads in the future, but he remains skeptical about the longevity of the present ownership. "City will move on – they will have great teams in the future. But I don't see how the ownership can continue after what's happened here and their reaction to it.
How can they be surprised? They've got irrefutable evidence – well where is it?
Put it out there." He expressed a mixture of shock and inevitability, saying he had long suspected the club of wrongdoing for two main reasons. First, he argued that it would be impossible for Manchester City to generate commercial revenue on par with clubs like Liverpool, Manchester United or Real Madrid without extraordinary circumstances. Second, he pointed out the club’s repeated claims of having "irrefutable evidence" of innocence, which, in his view, contradicted the prolonged nature of the investigation.
"It would be impossible for Man City ever to have the commercial revenue of Liverpool, Man Utd or Real Madrid. They said for years they had that type of income coming in. It's impossible for that to ever happen, no matter how successful Man City are. And number two, as they said yesterday and have continually said over this period, 'they've done nothing wrong, they have irrefutable evidence'.
Every man and his dog knows if you're charged by the police and had irrefutable evidence it would be over in a day or a week – this has dragged on for years. This idea that nothing has gone on and it has dragged on this long tells you something was there." Carragher lauded the Premier League for persisting with the case despite the club’s financial clout, noting the sheer volume of charges – 114 out of 115 – as evidence of a thorough investigation. "A huge well done to the Premier League for the result it seems they have right now.
For the Premier League to not just win this case but people talk about 114 charges out of 115 – they had to win it like that for it to be convincing." Turning to the impact on individual players, Carragher expressed empathy for those who have spent years wearing the sky‑blue shirt. He recognized that while some former City players continue to defend the club, the ongoing controversy casts a shadow over their achievements. "I'd be furious and I actually feel for the Man City players," he said. "As a team, what they've done is wrong.
The Premier League have called it a sham five times in their statement. But in terms of individual players, some of them are coming out to bat for the club, that's normal right now.
It must be very difficult for them to see anything that's going on and to almost feel like a lot of their career is going to have an asterisk with it, or people are just going to call it a sham." He singled out Kevin De Bruyne as an example of a world‑class talent whose legacy could be tarnished. Carragher noted that De Bruyne’s decision to join Manchester City may have been influenced, at least in part, by the inflated wages made possible by the club’s financial practices.
"He could have played for any team in the world and he still would have been one of the best players. He was fantastic.
But he chose his club to be Manchester City. Now, one of those reasons he may have chosen, maybe was his wages, that maybe were inflated because of the situation around Man City and what they've been charged with." He warned that if the narrative of a "sham" persists, it could affect how De Bruyne and his teammates are remembered long after they retire. "If he sits there at the end of his career now and the whole world looks at his Manchester City career of 10 years of service and look at it as a sham, and I keep using that word, that's the word the Premier League used, I'd be furious. Absolutely furious that around the world people are looking at my career like that because of what's going on upstairs." Carragher also criticised the club’s communication strategy, accusing City’s hierarchy of "gaslighting" players, former players and supporters by offering reassurances that many perceive as disingenuous.
He suggested that prolonged controversy could erode the goodwill that the club has cultivated over decades, leading to growing frustration among ex‑players who fear their personal legacies will be forever linked to the scandal. In summary, Carragher’s stance is clear: while Manchester City may eventually move on and continue to field strong squads, the titles earned under the cloud of financial misconduct should be removed, and the owners who oversaw the violations should be barred from running an English football club.
The emotional damage inflicted on players, fans and the broader football community, he argues, is the most serious consequence of the club’s actions, and it cannot be remedied simply by handing a medal to a runner‑up.