Two senior figures from separate high‑profile Premier League clubs told Sky Sports News that they would be "staggered" and "astonished" if a majority of the 20 clubs voted to remove Manchester City from the competition. They argued that such a step would amount to a "self‑inflicted commercial disaster" for the league as a whole. The independent commission that investigated the club’s alleged financial misconduct has a range of penalties at its disposal.
Earlier this week it concluded that Manchester City breached 114 of the 115 charges levied against it. Possible sanctions include a hefty fine, a deduction of league points, a transfer embargo, or, in the most extreme scenario, expulsion from the Premier League. Manchester City have consistently maintained that they did nothing wrong and have pledged to appeal the findings. In the meantime, Sky Sports News reports that discussions are ongoing among the owners and chief executives of other Premier League clubs.
Those talks are focused not only on the sporting implications but also on the legal ramifications, with several clubs assessing whether they might have a financial claim against City should the sanctions be enforced. A surprising twist has emerged: many rival clubs view Manchester City as a cornerstone of the league’s commercial appeal both domestically and abroad. One unnamed executive warned that voting to expel the club would be akin to "cutting off their noses to spite their faces." He explained that the presence of City drives broadcast revenue, sponsorship deals and global viewership. Removing the club would therefore jeopardise the financial health of every other member.
"If City were expelled, the commercial fallout would be massive for everyone in the league and would ultimately cost the other clubs a great deal of money," the executive said. He added that a decision to remove City during the current season or the next would leave only 19 clubs to fulfil the remaining fixtures. Broadcasters in the United Kingdom and overseas would likely demand refunds or renegotiated contracts because the product – fewer high‑profile matches – would be less attractive.
Sponsorship and corporate funding would also feel the shockwaves. Over the past two decades, Manchester City have become one of the most marketable brands in world football, attracting global sponsors and delivering premium exposure for league partners.
If the club were no longer part of the Premier League, those sponsors might pull back or reduce their spend, leading to a cascade of reduced income for all clubs. Beyond the financial aspects, the expulsion scenario raises questions about the futures of star players such as Erling Haaland, Phil Foden and other marquee talents. Their contracts, image rights and commercial endorsements are closely tied to the Premier League’s platform.
Removing City could jeopardise those arrangements, further diminishing the league’s commercial allure. One source summed up the risk succinctly, describing expulsion as "a risk not worth taking." There is also a strategic dimension to consider. Some top clubs believe that keeping City in the Premier League, despite the alleged breaches, could damage the competition’s brand and integrity in the long term.
They argue that a prolonged exclusion from the top flight might be necessary to preserve the league’s reputation on the world stage, even if it entails short‑term financial pain for all members. These divergent viewpoints are unlikely to influence the independent commission’s recommendation, but they could become pivotal if the clubs are called upon to vote on a potential expulsion. Should the commission advise that City be removed and the Premier League clubs vote against that recommendation, the outcome would be unprecedented. It is unclear what, if any, further sanctions could be imposed on the club in such a scenario.
Sky Sports News also sought opinions from the Championship about the prospect of City dropping into the second tier. If City were expelled from the Premier League, the Football Association and the English Football League would decide their fate, potentially requiring a vote of all 72 clubs across both divisions.
A majority would be needed to determine whether City would be admitted directly into the Championship or placed lower in the pyramid. One senior Championship director warned that City’s arrival would bring no benefit to the league. "What benefit does the Championship get from City joining? Absolutely none," he said.
"Their finances are so massive they would simply dominate the division, win promotion straight away, and rob other clubs of a realistic promotion chance. No other Championship side could compete with that level of wealth." Another Championship official stressed the need to protect the integrity of the entire English football pyramid, not just the Premier League.
"The decision‑makers must think about the whole system," he said. "If City are expelled, they should not be allowed to drop straight into the Championship without earning their way back up." A third source from the lower leagues expressed uncertainty but urged fairness: "There is a lot of speculation right now. We hope the interests of EFL clubs are taken into account and that any outcome is handled equitably." In summary, the debate over Manchester City’s possible expulsion touches on several critical themes: the financial interdependence of clubs, the commercial value of star players, the legal complexities of sanctions, and the broader question of how to safeguard the reputation of English football.
While the independent commission’s findings are clear, the ultimate decision will hinge on a delicate balance between punitive action and the collective economic interests of the league and its constituent clubs.