Two high‑ranking officials from separate elite Premier League clubs have told Sky Sports News that they would be "staggered" and "astonished" if a majority of the 20 clubs ever agreed to vote for Manchester City’s expulsion, describing such a step as tantamount to a "self‑inflicted commercial catastrophe". The independent commission that is reviewing the City case has a menu of possible penalties at its disposal.
Earlier this week it concluded that Manchester City had breached 114 of the 115 allegations levelled against it for alleged financial misconduct. While expulsion is the most extreme sanction, the commission could also impose a hefty fine, deduct points from City’s league tally, or impose a transfer embargo that would restrict the club’s ability to sign new players. Manchester City have consistently maintained that they are innocent of any wrongdoing and have pledged to contest the findings in every legal arena available to them.
According to sources, discussions are still ongoing among the senior figures at other Premier League clubs, both within individual clubs and in inter‑club meetings, about how they might respond to the commission’s recommendations. Some clubs are reportedly reviewing their own legal standing in case they wish to pursue a financial claim against Manchester City should the verdict stand.
In a surprising twist, a number of rival clubs view Manchester City as a cornerstone of the Premier League’s commercial appeal, both domestically and internationally. One unnamed executive warned that voting to expel City would be "cutting off their noses to spite their faces" because the financial fallout would be felt across the entire league.
"If City were thrown out, the commercial repercussions would be massive for every club," he told Sky Sports News. "Broadcast partners, both in the UK and abroad, would likely demand refunds or renegotiations because the product – fewer fixtures and a less compelling line‑up – would be diminished. Sponsorship deals and other corporate revenue streams would also take a hit, as the most dominant English club of the past two decades would no longer be part of the package that attracts global audiences." The executive explained that an expulsion during the current or next season would leave only 19 clubs to complete the remaining fixtures. This reduction would not only affect match‑day revenues but also undermine the league’s negotiating power with broadcasters, who could argue that the value of their contracts has been materially reduced.
Beyond the financial angle, the removal of star players such as Erling Haaland, Phil Foden and other marquee names would further erode the league’s marketability. One source summed up the sentiment by calling expulsion "a risk not worth taking," noting that the loss of high‑profile talent would diminish the Premier League’s global brand. There is also a strategic concern about setting a precedent. If top clubs were to defy the commission’s recommended sanction and collectively vote against expulsion, it would create an unprecedented scenario in English football governance.
While some clubs argue that keeping City in the top flight could tarnish the league’s integrity, others believe that short‑term financial pain is an acceptable price for preserving the competition’s long‑term reputation. The independent commission’s decision will ultimately be independent of club opinion, but the clubs’ votes could become decisive if the commission recommends expulsion and the Premier League members are called upon to ratify or reject that recommendation.
In such a case, the legal and sporting consequences of a rejected expulsion are unclear and could lead to further sanctions against City. Sky Sports News also gauged sentiment in the Championship regarding a hypothetical drop of Manchester City into the second tier.
If City were expelled, the Football Association and the English Football League would have to decide where the club would be placed. A vote involving all 72 clubs across the Premier League, Championship, League One and League Two would be required to determine City’s fate. One senior figure from a leading Championship club argued that City’s descent into the second division would bring no benefit to the league.
"The finances City would bring are so massive they would simply steamroll the Championship and bounce straight back up," he said. "That would effectively steal a promotion spot from another club and distort the competitive balance." Another Championship director emphasized the need to protect the integrity of the entire English football pyramid, not just the top flight. "Any decision on sanctions must consider the whole structure of the game," he said.
"If City are expelled from the Premier League, they should not be allowed to parachute straight into the Championship without earning it. They must work their way back up like any other club." A third source from the Championship expressed uncertainty about the process, noting that many details remain speculative. "We hope that the interests of EFL clubs are taken into account and that any outcome is fair," the source added. In summary, while the independent commission possesses a range of punitive tools—from fines and points deductions to the ultimate sanction of expulsion—most Premier League executives view the removal of Manchester City as a commercial self‑sabotage that would hurt every stakeholder.
At the same time, a faction of clubs believes that preserving the league’s image may require a harsh penalty, even if it means short‑term financial loss. The debate continues as the commission prepares its final recommendation, and the football world watches to see whether the Premier League will vote on one of the most consequential decisions in its modern history.