Kaveh Solhekol fielded a series of viewer questions about Manchester City after an independent commission concluded that the club had committed serious violations of Premier League financial regulations. City have consistently denied any wrongdoing and have announced their intention to appeal the verdict, with a deadline of Friday 2 October to lodge their challenge. In a live interview on Sky Sports News, Solhekol, the network's chief correspondent, addressed a wide range of topics, from the expected timetable for the appeal to the potential ramifications for the club’s league status, player contracts, and possible legal consequences. Below is a comprehensive recap of his answers, expanded with additional context to clarify the issues at stake.
**How long might the appeal process take?** RhydonDN asked whether the appeal could stretch over months or even years. Solhekol explained that, under the Premier League’s own procedural rules, City have until the October 2 deadline to submit an appeal. Once filed, the appeal is scheduled to be heard within roughly twelve weeks, meaning it should be concluded by the Christmas period. A written judgment is then expected within thirty days of the hearing, placing the final decision in the new year and well before the season ends.
The appeal will be heard by a fresh three‑person panel. However, Solhekol warned that City could also pursue a judicial review in the High Court, alleging that the Premier League’s process was biased or procedurally flawed.
A High Court challenge could extend the dispute for several years, potentially dragging the case into the next season or beyond. Additionally, the Football Association could open a separate investigation to determine whether any of its own rules were breached by the club or its officials. Finally, he noted that four clubs – Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Tottenham Hotspur – have already signaled an intention to sue City for compensation, and other clubs are likely to follow once the Premier League’s findings are finalised. **Could the Premier League impose a points deduction large enough to guarantee relegation?
Would the EFL accept City if they dropped down?** Josh queried whether the league could strip City of the maximum points possible, effectively forcing them into the English Football League (EFL), and whether the EFL would admit them to the Championship. Solhekol clarified that a sanctions hearing will follow the appeal, presided over by the same three individuals who sat on the original commission. Their remit includes a spectrum of possible punishments: outright expulsion from the Premier League, a points deduction, a transfer embargo, or a hefty fine.
If the panel opts for a points deduction that results in relegation, it is highly probable that the EFL would welcome City, given the commercial and sporting interest they generate. Conversely, if the club is expelled outright, the EFL would have to consider an application for admission, and the decision would rest with the 72 existing EFL clubs. While there is no legal barrier to admitting City, the situation would be unprecedented and would likely involve extensive negotiations among the league’s stakeholders. **Might the EFL refuse City entry altogether?
What would happen then?** Jonty wondered whether the EFL could simply block City’s entry. Solhekol responded that, technically, the EFL could reject an application, but he sees little reason for such a decision. City’s brand, fan base, and financial clout make them an attractive addition to any division, and the league would stand to benefit from the heightened media attention and revenue.
**If City are relegated via points deduction, will they still receive parachute payments?** Ash asked about the financial safety net that normally cushions clubs dropping from the Premier League. Solhekol affirmed that, under current regulations, any club relegated – regardless of the cause – is entitled to parachute payments designed to ease the transition to lower‑league revenues. Therefore, City would receive the same instalments as any other relegated side.
**Could the owners be forced to sell, or face criminal charges for alleged fraudulent accounts?** The “Owners test” raised the possibility of the owners’ charter being invoked, or criminal prosecution for false accounting. Solhekol explained that the newly established Independent Football Regulator (IFR) may intervene once the primary process concludes. The regulator has the authority to remove directors and compel a change of ownership if it deems the club’s governance unsuitable. However, City maintain that they will be cleared of all accusations, and any such drastic measures remain speculative at this stage.
**Can the IFR actually compel the current owners to relinquish control?** PolarBear sought confirmation. Solhekol reiterated that the regulator does possess the power to order an ownership sale, but this would only occur after a thorough investigation and only if the regulator concluded that the current owners were unfit. At present, the likelihood of such an outcome is low. **Why has the investigation focused only on the 2009/10‑2017/18 seasons and not later years?** Gooner2526 pointed out the apparent gap in the inquiry.
Solhekol noted that the evidence presented to the tribunal was limited to those seasons, largely because the material originated from a leak by Portuguese hacker Rui Pinto, who accessed City’s email servers and supplied documents to German outlet Der Spiegel. Those documents triggered UEFA’s and the Premier League’s investigations, but the tribunal’s remit was confined to the period for which verifiable evidence existed. **Is there a risk of criminal or regulatory probes into alleged corporate fraud?** Dan asked about the broader implications of the judgment, suggesting possible breaches of the UK Fraud Act 2006.
Solhekol warned that filing false financial statements is a serious offence. If authorities determine that City’s accounts were deliberately misleading, criminal charges could follow. HM Revenue & Customs may also examine whether the club evaded taxes or National Insurance contributions by paying staff off‑the‑books, as alleged by the commission. The National Economic Crime Centre could launch its own inquiry.
Nevertheless, City continue to assert their innocence and expect to be exonerated. **Would players be able to terminate their contracts if the club is punished severely, such as relegation?** MattC asked whether a relegation or other severe sanction would give players the right to walk away.
Solhekol explained that contract termination is not automatic; players would need to demonstrate that the club misrepresented material facts at the time of signing. Legal advice would be essential, and any claim would depend on the specific wording of individual contracts. **Why was the hearing conducted behind closed doors rather than in a public court?** Matt H questioned the secrecy of the process. Solhekol noted that the Premier League operates as a private association of twenty clubs, each bound by its own rulebook.
While sports lawyers argue for greater transparency, the league argues that its internal disciplinary matters are confidential and not subject to open‑court standards. In summary, the appeal process is slated to conclude within a few months unless City pursue a High Court challenge, which could dramatically extend the timeline. Potential sanctions range from points deductions to outright expulsion, each carrying distinct implications for the club’s league status, financial obligations, and ownership structure. The independent regulator, the FA, and possibly criminal authorities may all play roles as the situation unfolds.
The next few weeks will be crucial in determining Manchester City’s future trajectory.