Sympathy is scarce among other clubs after an independent disciplinary commission exposed the extent of Manchester City’s rule violations over nine seasons, publishing its findings last week. While City’s legal team prepares to appeal the verdict and face a sanctions hearing—following a judgment that the club breached Premier League regulations more than one hundred times—rival teams in England and across Europe are urging that any penalty "fit the crime." The prospect of City taking its appeal all the way to the High Court has heightened concerns among competing clubs about the damage to the Premier League’s reputation and the financial burden of a protracted legal battle. Many critics argue that City has shown little willingness to accept responsibility for its actions, further inflaming the situation.
City maintains its innocence, claiming that a "comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence" backs its position and that the club has done nothing wrong. The appeal has already been lodged, and the club is urging the authorities to reconsider the decision. A brief review of the commission’s report reveals the enormity of the challenge facing City’s lawyers when the appeal hearing is scheduled for before Christmas.
The findings describe financial misconduct of the highest seriousness, carried out consistently over nine seasons, which distorted competition and gave City an unfair advantage. As a result, many of the club’s rivals do not anticipate that Enzo Maresca’s side will remain in the Premier League next season.
Several observers argue that a simple points deduction would be insufficient if it merely results in City spending a single season outside the top flight. They contend that the punishment must reflect the systemic nature of the breaches, which spanned multiple years and involved substantial financial engineering. From a self‑interest perspective, other clubs recognize that City’s relegation would reduce the number of teams dropping down this season, remove a dominant title contender, and free up an additional European qualification spot. However, the prevailing sentiment is not driven solely by self‑interest; it is rooted in the principle that all clubs, regardless of size or stature, must be held to the same standards.
A one‑season sanction would be seen as a token gesture that fails to address the depth of the violations. Premier League rivals will not take part in the upcoming sanctions hearing, which may run concurrently with City’s appeal. The same three‑person panel that examined evidence during the 42‑day hearing in 2024 and issued the core decision last Tuesday will now decide on the appropriate sanctions after the Premier League, acting as prosecutor, presents its recommendation and City’s counsel argues its case. The Premier League board will ultimately determine what recommendation its legal team will submit to the panel.
In a precedent‑setting case from 2023, the league argued that Everton deserved a 12‑point deduction for a single breach of the Profitability and Sustainability Rules. After Everton appealed, the penalty was reduced to six points, illustrating how appeals can modify initial sanctions. With both sides now able to appeal the sanctions, and City preparing its own appeal, clubs are bracing for a marathon dispute that could extend well into the next year.
Executives have spoken of a desire to move toward an "NFL model" for English football, where the league speaks with a unified voice, but that vision will remain unrealized until the final chapter of the 115‑charge case is written. Sky Sports analyst Jamie Carragher has urged that any sanctions be imposed this season and that the punishment be sustained over many years.
He argued that the independent commission concluded more than £830 million of owner funding was used to inflate revenues and enable the club to meet Premier League and UEFA financial regulations through a series of sham arrangements. Carragher told Sky Sports News at the Legends of Football Awards: "Now that we know they're guilty, yes, there's an appeal, but now that they've got a big guilty verdict initially, I don't think anybody wants to wait.
It has to be done this season, because Man City need to be affected for next season. The word at the moment is sham; it would make the Premier League title this season a sham if Man City went on to win it with what we know has happened. So it has to be done this season, and I think the punishment, whatever it should be, cannot be a one‑off for one season because this has gone on for years and years; the punishment should go on for years and years." The broader football community is watching closely, aware that the outcome will set a precedent for how financial misconduct is handled in the sport. If City faces relegation or a severe points deduction, it could reshape the competitive landscape, affect broadcasting revenues, and influence future club investments.
Conversely, a lenient sanction might embolden other clubs to test the limits of financial regulations. In summary, while Manchester City insists on its innocence and prepares a robust legal defense, the consensus among its rivals is that the punishment must be proportionate to the scale and duration of the violations.
The upcoming hearings, appeals, and potential court actions will determine not only City’s fate but also the integrity of the Premier League as a whole.