Former England defender Gary Neville has warned that the ownership consortium of Manchester City could face a severe loss of standing at the club if the Premier League’s decision regarding alleged financial misconduct remains in force after the appeal process. The club announced on Friday that it has filed a thorough appeal challenging the guilty finding issued by an independent commission, which accused City of systematic breaches of financial regulations over a nine‑year span.
City have consistently denied any wrongdoing throughout a protracted investigation that began in 2018 and reached a pivotal moment on Tuesday when the Premier League released its formal determination, stating that the club was "guilty of all charges related to serious breaches." The league outlined a range of possible penalties, from hefty fines and points deductions to, in the most extreme scenario, expulsion from the competition. Neville, who also co‑owns EFL side Salford City, argued that the appropriate response should be a rigorous review of whether Manchester City’s owners meet the league’s owners’ and directors’ test.
He suggested that the alleged infractions have "dragged English football through the mud" and that the owners must be held to the same strict standards applied to all clubs. "It’s difficult to see how the Man City owners can satisfy the owners’ and directors’ test in this country if the guilty verdict stands," Neville said. "Because of past instances of improper club ownership, the league has introduced stricter rules. It will be a challenge for the City owners to retain their status under those regulations." He emphasized that football clubs are more than commercial enterprises; they are community assets that hold deep meaning for supporters and local residents.
"Owners have to comply with the rules and laws set out in the test because clubs are protected assets, community assets," he added. "The only appropriate punishment is to apply the owners’ and directors’ test first, then assess the achievements during the period in question and decide whether they should still be recognised." Neville further explained that the two most consequential actions would be to evaluate the club’s on‑field successes and to scrutinise the conduct of the owners and executives who oversaw that era.
"If I were Manchester City, I would accept a fine or even a points deduction – even a 60‑point penalty – because that would only cause temporary damage," he remarked. "Owning a football club in this country carries one of the greatest responsibilities imaginable and must be taken very seriously." The investigatory panel concluded that Manchester City had artificially inflated its revenue by more than £900 million through what the league described as "sham" deals, effectively circumventing the financial‑fair‑play regulations.
This inflated financial picture enabled the club to sign some of the world’s most expensive and high‑profile players, contributing to a period of dominance in English football’s major competitions. Neville expressed his disappointment at the broader implications for the Premier League, describing it as "our greatest export around the world" now tarnished by the scandal. "The best team of the last 15 years being found guilty of winning titles improperly is devastating," he said. "If the guilty verdict stands, those titles will forever be tainted, and the achievements will never be fully recognised." He called for a balanced approach that does not get lost in the minutiae of fines or points deductions but instead focuses on two core issues: the legitimacy of the club’s achievements during the contested period and the accountability of those who directed the club’s financial strategy.
"We can’t get bogged down with fines and points deductions," Neville warned. "We need to concentrate on the two most important things: the achievements during that time and what happens to the owners and executives who oversaw that period." In summary, Neville’s stance is that while monetary penalties and sporting sanctions are necessary, the ultimate test should be whether the owners pass the league’s stringent vetting process and whether the club’s historic successes can be preserved in the record books. If the appeal fails and the guilty verdict remains, the owners may lose their privileged status, and the club’s recent era of triumph could be forever marred by the shadow of financial misconduct.