Kaveh Solhekol recently fielded a series of fresh inquiries about Manchester City after an independent commission concluded that the club had committed serious breaches of the Premier League’s financial regulations. Despite the damning verdict, City continue to reject the findings and have announced their intention to appeal the decision. The deadline for lodging an appeal is Friday, 2 October, after which the case will move through several procedural stages.
During a live segment on Sky Sports News, Solhekol, the chief correspondent for the network, tackled a wide array of questions submitted by fans and journalists. Topics ranged from the anticipated timeline for an appeal decision, the possibility of City being expelled from the top flight and dropped into the English Football League (EFL), to the fate of player contracts, potential parachute payments, and the role of the newly‑created Independent Football Regulator. Below is a comprehensive recap of his answers, expanded with additional context to clarify how the process works and what the likely outcomes could be.
**How long might the appeal take?** RhydonDN asked whether the appeal could drag on for months or even years. Solhekol explained that, under the Premier League’s own timetable, City must file their notice of appeal by the Friday deadline.
Once the appeal is lodged, the league aims to wrap up the hearing and issue a draft decision before the Christmas period – roughly a twelve‑week window. After that, a final judgment is expected within thirty days, meaning the appeal could be resolved in the new year and well before the season concludes.
The hearing itself will be heard by a fresh three‑person panel, distinct from the original commission. However, Solhekol warned that City could choose to challenge the Premier League’s process in the High Court, alleging procedural unfairness. A judicial review would open a completely new legal track that could extend the dispute for years, potentially delaying any final resolution indefinitely. He also noted that the Football Association might launch its own investigation to determine whether any of its statutes were breached, adding another layer of scrutiny.
**Could other clubs sue for compensation?** Four of City’s rivals – Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur – have already indicated they will seek compensation for any competitive advantage they believe City gained through the alleged breaches. Solhekol expects additional clubs to follow suit once the Premier League’s internal process is complete, potentially leading to a series of civil claims. **What sanctions could the Premier League impose?** Josh asked whether the league could deduct enough points to guarantee City’s relegation, and whether the EFL would then admit them to the Championship. Solhekol clarified that the sanctions hearing will be conducted by the same three individuals who delivered the original judgment.
Their options include outright expulsion from the Premier League, a points deduction of varying magnitude, a transfer ban, or a substantial fine. If the penalty is limited to a points deduction that results in relegation, the EFL would likely accept City because of the commercial and sporting interest a club of City’s stature brings to the lower division.
In the event of expulsion, the situation becomes more complex. City would have to apply for admission to the EFL, and the decision would rest with the 72 clubs that make up the league’s membership. While there is no formal rule preventing their entry, the EFL would weigh the reputational risk against the financial boost that a high‑profile club could generate.
**Could the EFL refuse City entry altogether?** Jonty’s question touched on this scenario. Solhekol answered that, technically, the EFL could reject City’s application, but he sees little reason for them to do so. The league benefits from the media attention, sponsorship revenue, and fan engagement that a club like Manchester City would bring, even in the second tier.
**What about parachute payments if City are relegated?** Ash wondered whether City would still receive the parachute payments designed to soften the financial blow of dropping from the Premier League. Solhekol confirmed that the payments would be made automatically, just as they are for any other relegated club, because the mechanism is based on league status rather than the circumstances of relegation. **Might the owners be forced to sell, or could criminal charges follow?** Several questions addressed the potential involvement of the Independent Football Regulator (IFR) and the possibility of criminal proceedings.
Solhekol explained that the IFR now has the authority to intervene if it determines that club directors have acted improperly. This could include removing individuals from their positions or even compelling a change of ownership. However, he stressed that such drastic measures are unlikely at this stage because City maintains that they are innocent and intend to prove it.
Regarding criminal liability, Dan asked whether the evidence could trigger a fraud investigation under the UK’s Fraud Act 2006. Solhekol noted that filing false accounts is a serious offence, and authorities such as the National Economic Crime Centre or HM Revenue & Customs could open investigations if they suspect tax evasion or undeclared payments. The commission’s findings indicated that City may have paid staff and players “off‑the‑books,” which could attract scrutiny from tax officials.
**Can players terminate their contracts if the club is punished severely?** MattC raised the issue of whether players could walk away from their contracts if City were relegated or expelled. Solhekol responded that while contracts cannot simply be ripped up, players could seek legal advice to determine whether there is a breach of contract or misrepresentation that would allow them to terminate the agreement. In practice, most player contracts contain clauses that address relegation, but they rarely give the player an outright right to leave without mutual consent. **Why was the hearing held in private?** Matt H questioned the secrecy surrounding the hearing, suggesting that a public court setting would provide greater transparency.
Solhekol explained that the Premier League operates as a private association of twenty member clubs, each bound by a proprietary rulebook. The league therefore treats its disciplinary proceedings as confidential, arguing that opening them to the public could compromise sensitive information and the integrity of the process. **Looking ahead** The discussion also touched on why the investigation stopped at the 2017/18 season. Solhekol indicated that the evidence presented to the tribunal was limited to that timeframe, largely derived from material obtained by Portuguese hacker Rui Pinto and published by German outlet Der Spiegel in 2018.
Subsequent seasons have not been examined because the tribunal’s remit was confined to the data that was legally disclosed. In summary, the appeal process is designed to conclude within a few months, but any escalation to the High Court could dramatically extend the timeline.
Potential sanctions range from points deductions to outright expulsion, each carrying different implications for the EFL and for City’s financial arrangements. The Independent Football Regulator may eventually become involved, and criminal investigations remain a possibility if authorities find evidence of fraudulent accounting or tax avoidance. Players, meanwhile, may have limited avenues to terminate contracts, and the private nature of the hearing reflects the Premier League’s status as a closed, member‑driven organisation.