Kaveh Solhekol recently tackled a flood of fan questions about Manchester City after an independent commission concluded that the club had breached Premier League financial regulations in every charge brought against it. Despite the damning verdict, City maintain their innocence and have announced plans to appeal the decision, with a deadline of Friday 2 October to lodge their challenge. During a live segment on Sky Sports News, Solhekol, the network's chief correspondent, addressed a broad spectrum of issues raised by viewers. Topics ranged from the anticipated timeline for the appeal, the possibility of City being demoted to the English Football League (EFL), the fate of player contracts under such circumstances, and the potential involvement of an independent football regulator.
Below is a comprehensive recap of his answers, expanded for clarity and context. **How long might the appeal process last?** One viewer, RhydonDN, asked whether the appeal could stretch over months or even years. Solhekol explained that the Premier League’s internal procedure is relatively swift. City must file their appeal by the October 2 deadline, after which the league aims to wrap up the review by the Christmas period – roughly a twelve‑week window.
Following that, a judgment is expected within thirty days, meaning a final decision on the appeal should be delivered early in the new year and well before the season concludes. The appeal itself will be heard by a newly appointed three‑person panel over a five‑day session. However, Solhekol warned that City could choose to take the matter to the High Court, alleging procedural unfairness or bias. A judicial review would open a new legal front that could extend the dispute for years.
Additionally, the Football Association (FA) retains the right to launch its own investigation into whether any of its statutes were breached by the club or its staff. Meanwhile, four clubs—Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur—have already signaled intentions to sue City for compensation, and other clubs are likely to follow once the Premier League process finishes. **Could the Premier League impose a points deduction large enough to relegate City, and would the EFL accept them?** Josh queried whether the league might strip City of enough points to guarantee relegation, and whether the EFL would then admit them into the Championship.
Solhekol clarified that a sanctions hearing is pending, during which the same three individuals who sat on the original commission will decide the appropriate penalty. Their options include expulsion from the Premier League, a points deduction, a transfer ban, or a substantial fine.
If the punishment is solely a points deduction that results in relegation, it is likely the EFL would accept City, given the commercial and sporting interest a club of that stature brings. Conversely, if City were expelled outright, the EFL would have to consider a formal admission application, and the decision would rest with the league’s 72 member clubs.
Nevertheless, Solhekol expressed doubt that the EFL would reject City, noting the club’s massive fan base and revenue potential. **What if the EFL refuses City entry?** Jonty asked whether the EFL could block City’s entry and what the consequences would be. Solhekol replied that, technically, the EFL could deny admission if City were expelled, but he could not conceive a scenario where the league would turn down such a high‑profile club.
**Would City receive parachute payments if relegated by points deduction?** Ash wondered about the financial safety net for a relegated City. Solhekol answered that, like any other club dropping from the Premier League, City would be entitled to parachute payments, which are designed to cushion the economic impact of relegation. **Could the owners be forced to sell, or face criminal charges for alleged fraud?** A question from "Owners test" focused on the owners' charter and the possibility of forced sale or criminal prosecution. Solhekol noted the existence of an Independent Football Regulator, which could intervene after the current proceedings conclude.
The regulator has the authority to remove directors and compel a change of ownership, but such outcomes are considered unlikely at this stage because City maintain they will be cleared of wrongdoing. **Can the independent regulator actually eject the current owners?** PolarBear asked the same question, and Solhekol confirmed that the regulator does possess the power to force an owner to sell, though it remains a distant prospect.
**Why aren’t later seasons under investigation?** Gooner2526 pointed out that the tribunal’s findings covered the 2009/10‑2017/18 seasons and asked why subsequent years have not been examined. Solhekol explained that the evidence presented to the tribunal only extended to 2018.
Much of that material originated from a Portuguese hacker, Rui Pinto, who accessed City’s email accounts and supplied the data to German magazine Der Spiegel. Those leaks prompted UEFA’s and the Premier League’s investigations, but the tribunal was limited to the information it received, which stopped at the 2017/18 campaign. **Could there be a criminal or regulatory investigation into alleged corporate fraud?** Dan raised concerns that the judgment hints at large‑scale corporate fraud. Solhekol said that if false accounting is proven, the club could face charges under the UK Fraud Act 2006.
Additionally, HM Revenue & Customs might investigate potential tax evasion, given the commission’s suggestion that City paid certain individuals off‑the‑books, possibly avoiding National Insurance and tax obligations. The National Economic Crime Centre could also become involved.
However, City continue to assert that they have done nothing illegal and remain confident that their reputation will be restored. **Would players be able to terminate contracts if the club is punished severely?** MattC asked whether a relegation or expulsion could give players the right to walk away from their contracts. Solhekol responded that while contracts cannot simply be ripped up, players could seek legal advice and potentially argue that they were misled about the club’s financial health at the time of signing.
If a court finds the club breached its duty of disclosure, a player might be released from the agreement, though such cases would be evaluated individually. **Why was the hearing conducted in private rather than in an open court?** Matt H questioned the secrecy surrounding the hearing, suggesting that a public High Court proceeding would provide transparency.
Solhekol explained that the Premier League operates as a private association of 20 member clubs, each bound by its own rulebook. The league therefore treats disciplinary matters as confidential, limiting public access to protect the integrity of its internal processes. In summary, the appeal timeline is relatively short unless City pursue a High Court challenge, which could dramatically extend the dispute. The sanctions panel holds a wide range of powers, from points deductions to outright expulsion, each carrying different implications for City’s future in English football.
The independent regulator may eventually intervene, but any forced sale or ownership change remains speculative. Meanwhile, the possibility of criminal investigations into alleged false accounting looms, though no formal charges have been announced. Players, clubs, and governing bodies all await the final verdict, which will shape the landscape of English football for years to come.