Football Daily - Man City guilty of 114 charges - 5 Live Reaction

Episode Date: September 25, 2026

Mark Chapman presents reaction to the news Manchester City have been found guilty of almost all of the 115 charges of breaching the Premier League's financial rules. He's joined by journalists Dale Johnson, Rory Smith, David Ornstein & Sam Lee to look at the significance of the news, what comes next and the possible fallout on other Premier League clubs and beyond. Football finance expert Stefan Borson also offers a unique insight into how we got here, and what may come next.Fans of Manchester City give their reaction, while we hear from supporters of Liverpool and Manchester United on what opposition clubs think of the news.  And BBC business correspondent Sean Farrington talks through the repercussions of decision on the club and the Premier League. Timecodes: 0:33 What's happened today, and will Manchester City be shocked? 13:18 David Ornstein on breaking the news 34:00 Sam Lee joins to discuss the impact on City themselves 45:45 City fans share their perspective 57:41 How has football gotten into this mess? And could this be a victory for traditionally 'big' clubs? 01:07:04 Liverpool & Man United fans on how they've been impacted 01:19:50 Sean Farrington on the repercussions for the Premier League & its brand

This BBC podcast is supported by ads outside the UK. It felt like everything I believed in was suddenly collapsing. This is the story of an Islamic boarding school in Indonesia with a dark secret, of the school's head teacher. This was someone I respected above anyone else. And the investigation led by students, he's trying to silence. If this is leaked to the media, I'll be destroyed. This is World of Seward.

Secrets, Catching My Teacher. Listen on BBC.com, the BBC app or wherever you get your BBC podcasts. You're listening to the Football Daily podcast with Mark Chapman. Right, let's try and take you through the day then as far as Manchester City are concerned. More than three and a half years after being charged with breaching the Premier League's financial rules, it does appear. The Premier League haven't confirmed this. And I'll give you a Manchester City statement shortly, which doesn't

confirm it either, but it does appear that they've been found guilty of almost all the charges. Let's start with BBC Sportsdale Johnson, sitting across me in the studio. What were they accused of and how have we ended up here this evening? Yeah, well, you said this was three and a half years in the making, when it's really probably eight years, which is when there was first leaks published by the German newspaper de Spiegel, and it alleged that there had been sponsorship revenues from the state-owned airline. Etihad another company linked to Manchester City and

Shaitman Shoe's Abu Dhabi United Group. And the income had been disguised as sponsorship income by channeling the funds through the company the accounts. Now, this was alleged it was a means of meeting financial fair pay rules introduced by UEFA in 2011 and also the profit and sustainability rules

brought in the Premier League in 2012, which limited clubs permitted losses. Now the suggestion is that this money made it appear that the club weren't losing money, that they actually were. Now, the 115 charges are broken up into 54 of failing to provide accurate financial information. 35 are failing to cooperate. But probably the most important are the seven of breaching the PSR rules. Five are failing to comply with UEFA's rules. And 14 of making payments to players and managers.

through these companies and clubs? Nothing has been confirmed. The Premier League and Manchester City, nothing has been confirmed. City's statement today, the Premier League process remains ongoing with significant elements to be completed and subject to strict confidentiality.

As such, Manchester City's position remains consistent with the statement of February 2023. The club has diligently respected the due process for eight years on the basis that the Premier League Board and executive will behave as an independent, impartial and fair-minded regulator, free from partisan influence. And that's where we're at, isn't it? Nothing has been officially comfort.

Yeah, I mean, it's been incredible, really. It's been a very tight process. There'd be no leaks about any potential results or sanction until now. Now, BBC Sport has been told by senior club source that a select group of club directors were informed by email and had to sign a non-disclosure agreement before they could read the document about the league and Man City's charges. Now, clearly, that NDA appears as it was not particularly watertight

because now we've found out this information, we found out that the decision has been reached, and Man City are going to face punishment. Do you think it's important, before I bring Rory and Stefan did, to highlight that there are. is no, when we look at a punishment at this stage, that there is no precedent to this case. Yes, there are elements of this case that have been punished before. But all of those charges, that bigger picture, there is no precedent.

People could, you know, point at this club or that club and a punishment there on what happened to them in that league and so on and so forth. Yep, there's absolutely nothing. I mean, you can look at the 10 points reduced to 6, which Everton got, followed by their two points for PSR. Forrest got four points with PSR, but those were minor breaches. These are seven breaches across three years, which Manchester City have been charged with. And that's just one aspect, remember.

It's not all the other payments to manage and, etc. They've got a Chelsea example as well. The difference there was they omitted everything. They entered into a... Just sorry, just go back to what that... So people understand that that was, again, that's a different charge that they had, what they were charged with and then what they agreed. Yeah, exactly.

so Chelsea was about making illegal payments to agents and registered agents. Now, this was made before Blueco bought the club, so they self-reported that they'd found these payments, and because of that, they basically presented the evidence that the Premierly wanted, and they were able to sit down and make a sanctioning agreement. They basically said, we'll accept this.

Manchester City is very different because they've denied everything, every allegation throughout, so they will now go to a third. sanctioned hearing rather than an agreement, which means everything's on the table. They're going to appeal. Oh, they're absolutely going to appeal. They've said throughout that this is not something they're guilty of. They've behaved correctly throughout.

So it was always been the case whereby if Manchester City did get found guilty here, they would appeal it. Now, the question here is, how long is that going to take? We've been here eight years already. Two years since this case actually hearing started. So how long is it going to take for us? to get through this whole appeal process. So the idea that we're sat here now

and we're on the brink of a resolution to this, I think we're kidding ourselves and it's going to be a long way down the line before we find out exactly what the punishment is and when an appeal is going to be heard and what the decision is on that from them. If I asked you how long that will be, you would presumably be just guessing, would you?

We've been guessing for the last two years over these 115 charges. So I think the ability to guess what the appeal committee will come up with is impossible. And then the final point, I suppose, at this stage, is over the PSR, using the Everton example, Burnley sued Everton. Is that correct?

Yeah. That's one example. If this is over a much longer period of time, and there are all sorts of different charges, is your understanding that there are clubs queuing up? Yes, and it seems very likely to happen. So if we just remind people what happened in the Burnley case, they finished in the relegation zone. Evernor finished just above the relegation zone.

Burnley argued that without Everton overspending on PSR, they would not have been able to sign the players they had. They wouldn't have got the points they would, and Bernie could have stayed up. So now what you've got in the terms of Manchester City, you've got those teams that finished second in the Premier League, Manchester United twice, and Liverpool. But it's not just about the teams that finish second.

It's also about those teams that finish fifth and sixth and missed out in the Champions League or just below and missed out in Europe or teams that lost to Manchester City home and away and got relegated. There are many different aspects where clubs could argue that their chance of success has been impacted by this and raise a financial claim which is possible within the Premier League rules.

So a club that was, and I haven't gone through every season, but a club that was relegated in 2015 and lost twice to Manchester. Manchester City and were relegated by three points. I know that may not be the exact situation for the year I've given, but that's the example. They might think they have a case. There's a much stronger claim for the teams at the top end of the table

because clearly they're more closer to Manchester City's league position, but certainly the lowdown you go, if you feel you can make a strong legal argument that Manchester City's financial advantage put them in a worse position, then there will be the chance that they're going to, a claim could be made there too. And just the final one on that, does that only extend to the Premier League?

If you are Stoke who won the FA Cup in 2010-11, do you know if they would be able to claim anything? That would be a different process because... Oh, good. It's just what does it bring into the conversation? The Premier League has it within its own regulations whereby clubs can raise claims of compensation about another member club.

When you're getting into the FA Cup, and the AFL Cup, then that's a slightly different matter. But certainly in terms of the Premier League, the rule exists. All right, Dale, for the moment, thank you. We're going to talk to David Ornstein shortly. Rory Smith, observers, football correspondent with us, football finance expert, Stefan Borson with us as well, who was an advisor to Manchester City up until 2008.

Stefan, I just want to go back to something that you said less than two weeks ago on talk sport, not in terms of saying that you were wrong, but actually it gave an indication of the feeling maybe from your point of view of what Manchester City have been thinking internally and that they had a level of confidence, you said, in terms of the spending that they've done this summer, that they feel that they've won.

And therefore, do you think that that was their feeling over the last three years, that they had a case that they would win and will be in shock this evening? Yes. So, you know, I think in very simple terms, there's no question in the city have been confident about the outcome. If you watch any of the interviews with Caldoun Armourou-Barrack, the chairman, you see the way that they've invested both in the playing side, but also in the infrastructure and the stadium, very much a business-as-usual approach. But ultimately, you know, legal cases are very frequently, lost by people who think they've got strong cases. And this bit of it is not unusual. What is unusual is that you would lose a case where the allegations are as serious as they are in this respect. And the city will have effectively taken a legal strategy

to admit nothing and to fight it out as hard as they could and not to approach it in the way that Chelsea did with their settlement and sanction agreement approach. And clearly that legal strategy right now. Yes, pending appeal, but we'll talk about that more later. That's not a great strategy, but pending appeal, that strategy, the city of employed, has gone very badly wrong.

Rory, what's your initial thoughts? Yeah, I do not. I agree with Stefan. I think if you look at the way that the day sort of played out, I think it's pretty clear that City certainly weren't expecting, I'm not sure anyone was expecting it to come out today. I don't think, and the fact that no one, you know, the Premier League haven't released a statement. City, you've kind of put a statement out through a spokesperson, but it's not a formal kind of, here is our kind of account of the case.

I think everyone's been a little bit court-crolled. I know that certainly until a couple of hours ago, there was no kind of internal, I don't think City had kind of forewarned the staff that was coming, which suggests to me, I think ordinarily they do that when there's been kind of a major development in any of the various cases at any point in the last three and a half centuries or whatever it's been. since this started. They've tended to kind of, as you would, as good managers would, you would kind of give a little bit of internal dialogue just to reassure your staff, I guess,

does it affect real people who are not paid footballer wages? I don't think that's happened today. I think that they've been caught cold by it. And I agree with Stefan, I think if you look at the way that they have behaved this summer, it didn't smack of a club that was hedging its bets at all. Now, I guess the thing is,

if I was a very highly paid lawyer, I would tell my client it had gone really well. I think that they're probably susceptible to that. And, yeah, people who think they've got strong cases, lose cases. That does happen. So I think there will be a degree of shock and surprise, certainly at the scale of it.

Stefan, you would disagree, would you just? Well, only to the extent that lawyers do not mislead their clients in these sorts of situations. They're usually very frank. and City had a legal team of Clifford Chance as the solicitors and a whole host of the very best barristers, not just in this country, some of them in the world. And those people go through hearings,

they sense directions of travel, of panels, and they are frank with their clients. They don't tend to sugarcoat it, and they would have laid out the risks, but overall City's conclusion as a group does appear to be very confident

and you know they've been found wanting but look it happens people lose cases they expect to win the problem is from this position the city are now in they're in a very difficult spot because the findings put them

in to try and appeal this scale of defeat is going to be very difficult well come on to the the possibility of an appeal and why they would, and maybe would it make sense not to? I don't know. We'll discuss that in a moment.

Let's just bring in the Athletics Football correspondent, David Ornstein, who broke the story. And as I understand it, David, you were on a panel at the Portuguese FAA's annual football summit in Lisbon when you got wind of this. Therefore, I am assuming you weren't expecting it for a while either. Good evening, everybody. Yeah, I was on there.

a panel at the Portugal Football Summit when my phone started vibrating, which normally happens when I'm on air with you, Chappas. It does, yeah, absolutely, yeah. But we had started to get wind actually earlier today, my colleague Matt Slater, who you know well, has got really good connections around this

and everything else within the industry and was hearing that it was coming and that it wasn't good news for Manchester City. And so you obviously start making your checks and speaking to sources across the industry and triangulating your information. And actually Dale gave a really good summary of it all, including when he mentioned, you know,

clubs have been informed and non-disclosure agreement. So you're starting to get to a point where a lot of people, whether it be at the Premier League, at Manchester City, at the other clubs, elsewhere, talk. And so, yeah, it wasn't a complete surprise. I mean, it was always going to be a Friday and ruins everyone's weekend, right? But in terms of Rory's point, I don't know,

maybe during the international break, it's a bit quieter. And we've had many false thorns on this and, you know, rumors and speculation. But this one was different immediately when you started checking with people, they were either climbing up or saying, yeah, yeah, today's the day, so it's when it emerged.

And just quickly, Mark, in terms of you saying things haven't been officially announced, yeah, not to the public. but as we said there, the clubs have been informed. Yeah, and therefore, does it, you may not be able to answer this, I don't know, are you surprised that it has come out the way it has if the clubs were told yesterday? Because surely as soon as you do that,

you would expect it to come out somewhere. And it just appears to have, there doesn't appear to have been a process by which to announce this? Yeah, and I don't really know how to answer that. Considering it's such a huge story, David, seems utterly bizarre. Yeah, but the whole process has been bizarre. I mean, we all remember these charges dropping 7th of February, 2023. I was on a chairlift in a ski resort.

It was aware, were you moment. We've all got that recollection, and then we've had so many sort of stages of the process, the commission took place, two years have passed since then. I mean, this is a case in essence that goes back to 2009, Mark. So in terms of the fights, the delays, the suggestions of the panel being compromised by the makeup of the individuals on it, claim and counterclaim. So when you get to the logistical end, yeah, I'm sure now we look at it and say it should have been handled in a more formal way. I don't know, an announcement from the Premier League or a joint announcement by all parties like we saw.

or with, I don't know, when Manchester City were up against the Premier League on Associated Party transactions. But even that started to leak out earlier because it's a league of members, you know, and people start to be told. And there's individuals within every organisation involved in this and lawyers too. So it's not as easy as you suggest, even though I think it would all be, it would be better for all parties, even though I say that as a journalist, if it came out in a slightly cleaner way. David's made that point, Stefan, actually, that we don't know the makeup of the independent panel.

We don't know the three people on it. Is that, in your experience, is that standard? And do you agree with it? And thirdly, by not knowing who has made those decisions, doesn't it make a process that the Premier League want to be transparent, less transparent? Well, I think the first thing to say is that the Premier League don't want the process transparency at this point. I mean, nobody, and, you know, this is just

a statement of fact, nobody's made an attempt to explain anything about the process, timetable, process, participants, et cetera, et cetera. So everything that we know has been effectively briefed out or leaked out over time, and this is no different in terms of the outcome right now. We don't know exactly who was on the panel, but you wouldn't expect to at this point until you get the decision published. Now, the decision, there's a bit of a nuance in the rules as to whether this part of the decision, which is liability only, i.e. whether Manchester City did it, and it now appears they did, this part of the decision may or may not constitute something that's announceable and a decision that should be published. There's probably a debate ongoing right now

in front of the very same independent commission as to whether this document can be published before the next part of the process. Now, I think that there is a public interest in that coming out and at least giving us some kind of insight into the results, the reasons for the results, and then we'll know at that point all of the participants, so who is on the independent commission,

who decided what, when everything took place, the subsequent hearings, the consequentials that came from it. So all of that can come out now. But I don't think that there's a particular desire for the process to be played out in public. And I think that's actually one of the criticisms that everybody will have. And it won't change for the sanction part of the hearing, which will also be in private. And we will also be waiting around for it to drop in a similar way at some point in the future. I'll come back to the sanctions in a little while.

just one more with you, David, and I'll let you go and enjoy your evening in Lisbon. What are you, if you can, what are you sensing from other clubs? You heard me talk to Dale about if they are lining up already for compensation and who might be. Is that the sense that you are getting? Yeah, Dale was spot on,

and I think we'll see reports on this in due course. Initially, when we broke the news, there seem to be, among some you spoke to some shock, a lot of questions about, you know, and I'm talking from sort of clubs, what happens next? When's the sanction? Is the appeal going to come before or after the sanctions? So there seemed, I don't know, confusion and numbness, but the more conversations I've had indicate that it's been reported for some time that there are ambulance chasing lawyers out there

who have been proposing action to clubs for quite some time. I'm talking months, maybe even years as this has gone on. And clubs will have been speaking. We saw what happened with Burnley and Everton. That's a very fascinating and important case in all of this because action has happened. And it probably will happen in this because the ramifications for clubs that have missed out on Champions League,

I think I was reading Tottenham six times to Manchester City in that period. Teams relegated clubs who had sponsorship agreements that would allow massive bonuses if they got into Europe, competition, players and their bonuses, there is so much at stake here that it's inevitable, we'll see action. And I don't think when you look at the magnitude of the clubs involved in the Premier League, the egos and the wealth of the owners, the amount at stake for all of those clubs, that they're going to be frightened of Man City here. I think they're going to come forward and put their best foot forward to try and take action. And I think that's going to be one of the

biggest stories, the greatest unknowns in all of this. And that's why, you know, you could see all hell breaking loose. It's not an amazing situation for the Premier League to be in, taking on one of its members, its record title winner. And, you know, this is a seismic day. I mean, the like of which the Premier League's not seen before, nor European or world football. However, the big question is what's to come on the punishment and then City's reaction and how far they fight it. You imagine the sanctions would come relatively soon, but I think the appeal could take quite some time. And then we've seen, you know, parallel examples

that I'm sure you'll explore Saracens getting relegated in premiership rugby. There was Juventus in Seria, so on and so forth. It's opening up a Pandora's box and a hornet's nest and goodness knows where things go from here. Can you see a resolution finally? Interesting. A number of conversations I've had. suggest that there could be a settlement between the parties now that we've got a verdict,

or that city will just continue to fight tooth and nail for this. I mean, the conversations I've had around the clubs seem to be relatively calm and bullish. They've always denied the charges strenuously, said they've got an irrefutable body of evidence. It'll be fascinating to see where they go with that now and what we learn from here on in. So yeah, at some point, I think this is a day that got us closer to a resolution, if nothing else. And I don't know if that was a day of acceptance from City in some degree. But I think we're closer to clarity than ever before. David, thank you very much.

What about European clubs beaten in the Champions League here? Will there be a – would they have a case? or is that separate because it's UEFA because UEFAs have been involved in this? I think you need to remember that there was already a UEFA case that covered this several years ago. Now, Manchester City were found guilty and they were given a one-year ban from the Champions League.

Now, Manchester Sea appealed that to the Court of Arbitration for Sport and they won that on a technicality which said that the offences happened outside of the jurisdiction of time that UEFA could bring charges. So that ban was repealed. But I think because of that basis and the fact that UEFA had already taken their own type of punishment

and the fact that there is a statute of limitations, I think it's very unlikely that a team beaten in the Champions League would have a case on this front. And Leigham, Luxembourg, Luxembourg, goes back to those UEFA charges and the breaching of the rules and says, is there not some kind of double jeopardy? No, no, like I said, effectively, Manchester City faced no punishment.

because it was outside of the timescales where you have could do anything. I think another interesting point I was just thinking while you were talking there. When you look at clubs like Aston Villa and Newcastle now are trying to break into the top clubs and yet they've got this PSR glass ceiling that they can't go through,

they must be looking tonight at the way Manchester City are able to do this and effectively spend what they want to become this club they are now, which is far bigger than they were in 2009 when this old process started off and they must be thinking this is really unfair

that Manchester City are in this position and they should get punished strongly. Dale, thank you very much for being with us. I thought one of the things, Rory, that David honestly said there that really rang true was all hell will break loose. Yeah, I mean it sounds like a really kind of

highfaluting and pretentious concept but when people talk about sporting integrity and the integrity of a competition. This is a really good example of it because, and we have to, obviously, everything's subject to appeal,

City didn't deny everything, but if what's happened today is kind of the thing that turns out to be true and City have, are in the end found guilty, then what you have is a lead that can't really function

because, yeah, teams that miss out in the Champions League sue other teams because they, you know, for lost earnings, I'd only mention the commercial partnerships. That hadn't occurred to me, but that's a perfectly valid thing.

If you've got a commercial contract that gives you an extra 2 million quid as you get into the Champions League, then you probably want that 2 million twid back. And we've seen with the with the Everton case that clubs are willing to do it, that they feel that if you are in breach of the rules,

then there should be some sort of liability there. And I think it all goes back, and Dale's quite right, goes back to 2009. If it is the case that this verdict stands through appeal, the appeal process, then you not only have

like, what does the last 17 years of the Premier League mean? Like, does that, does it kind of count? Do we, and whether they, you know, strip the titles of it off anybody or not, how are we as fans meant to kind of feel about that? What does the future of the Premier League look like if, if, you know, half a dozen clubs are mired in legal action against each other? How does it kind of manage to keep going as a going concern?

And that is why, without wanting to sound to Ponzi, that's why you have, or you need to have amongst owners and executives, a degree of kind of kind of. belief in the integrity of the top of the competition that you have to kind of sign you sign up the rules you comply with the rules because if you don't this is kind of the alternative and I think it is it's obviously as it stands a defeat for city and a pretty resounding one but I don't think this is anything like a victory for the premier league this whole case I think has been it has been one that the Premier League can only really lose they lose every single which way and they've done the right thing by pursuing it it would appear because it seems as though they you know that the

an independent panel has found that they had cause to pursue it. But the consequences for them are pretty severe. And I think that's the other thing that's really unprecedented. We don't really know how that plays out in what I'm going to have to call the court of public opinion. How do fans react to it? What does it mean for our relationship with the Premier League? That's really significant. And actually, Stefan, those financial incentives that are there run all the way through the league, don't they?

Yes, there will be those commercial deals for if you qualify, for Champions League or Europa League. But bearing in mind, every position has a cash prize put on it. You can see why the All Hell could break loose phrase is apt. Yeah, I mean, I've been using the phrase really since the start of the case because I think it is apt. And I agree with everything Rory said. We are now in uncharted territory.

And I agree with Rory that the Premier League, it is positive that their governance, procedures and desire to punish wrongdoing appears to have been vindicated, but the fallout is enormous. And you're talking about places in the league, but it's even beyond that, there's players' bonuses.

There's even player salaries in given seasons that can change on the basis of whether you qualify for the Champions League or not. A number of players will have a 20 to 25% increase based on whether they're in the Champions League. That's been lost. There's managers that have lost bonuses. There's players that have lost.

bonuses. There's a whole raft of consequential losses that may be said to have been caused by city's breaches. To try and unravel it within the league's structures is incredibly difficult. Settling it, which was a suggestion that some people have made. I think maybe David suggested that that that's something that's ongoing. I think in terms of city's position, that looks unlikely. if after appeal city are in a situation where they can't overturn the decision, then they may well look to do effectively some sort of group settlement with a number of clubs based on certain metrics. If not, we are going to be in a period where clubs are not fighting each other,

but are going after Manchester City for financial losses that will run into the tens of millions of pounds in all likelihood. And it's not even ambulance chasers that are running that. It's some of the best firms in the country. So it's very, very serious. And all of those phrases held breaking loose, hornet's nests, all the things that David and Rory have used are correct. Would you seriously think about whether to appeal or not then, Stefan? I had somebody text me this evening who works in football saying,

if I were there, I wouldn't appeal, they said to me. the anger will just grow and likely result in a greater sanction? Well, yeah, look, the starting point is that this is going to be six or seven hundred pages, or that sort of length, of an independent commission being scathing about the behavior of Manchester City over a decade. And they're going to have to make findings against individuals where they say they did not believe the evidence that they gave. They're going to say that they don't believe the documents that Manchester City present. as this so-called irrefutable evidence. So they are going to go very, very hard on Manchester City.

They're going to go very hard on Manchester City in the next part of the process. And their findings of fact, i.e., those things that they believe happened, having heard the evidence over 12 weeks, will be very, very hard to overturn at appeal. But City in their announcement tonight, in the statement that they gave, I think to the athletic, or possibly more widely, have suggested that, that perhaps they're going to try and push around the idea that maybe the panel wasn't impartial or maybe it was biased or that type of argument. Those types of arguments are extremely unlikely to succeed. They have been run by other clubs. They usually fail. I would expect them to fail here.

And that then means that you're left with a situation where it's very hard to challenge the factual findings, but also it's hard to challenge the independence of the panel. Yes, it makes sense not to appeal, but I'm sure City are going to appeal. And Rory, I know, just let me read that phrase again then, Rory, and then you come in. Just the club, this is from Manchester City, the club has diligently respected due process for eight years on the basis that the Premier League Board and Executive would behave as an independent, impartial and fair-minded regulator free from partisan influence. Yeah, and Stefan's reading of that. the same as mine. It feels a little bit like a kind of what's the equivalent of like in a movie where someone like opens their coat and just shows you that they might have something

underneath it that that it feels like it's got very much that that sort of tone. I think there is no world in which Manchester City cannot appeal for as long as it is possible to appeal because not only have they throughout this process strenuously which is the word that the word they've done a real real job for the world's word strenuously in the last three and a half years of city. they have strenuously denied their allegations, they maintain their innocence, etc. But also the nature of the city project cannot tolerate that sort of stain.

Regardless of where you stand on the nature of Man City's ownership, it has a kind of a public image sphere to it, an element of public imagery to it, that is not true, say, of a random hedge fund, buying a club or whatever. You can think that those are the same thing, that's fine. for the owners of Manchester City

to have to deal with the reputational damage of even accepting a £1 fine for cheating is too much to bear. They will pursue it. I think Dale said earlier that we're not... I mean, we might not even be halfway through this process, is the reality of it. They will appeal it for as long as they can appeal it

just because whatever the punishment is and the punishment might be incredibly severe and really swinging and hugely damage into city into English football as a whole. But the reputational damage is something they cannot tolerate. rate. So they will appeal it, I think. I'd expect them to appeal it for as long as they can possibly appeal it. Rory Smith from the observer, Stefan Borson, Football Financial Expert and

Dale Johnson from BBC Sport are with us. Sam Lee, Manchester City correspondent from The Athletic. joins us now. Quiet, quiet day? It got progressively more serious, I would say. Yeah, went to bed knowing, oh, this could come out and then By the longest time, it was like, yeah, this is too legit for it to be another false dawn. And then over the next couple of hours, it's like, oh, oh, this is very bad. This is very bad. I'm very serious. So, yeah, busy.

Is that the sense you are getting from your city contact? Not really, because up until, I would say the last hour or so, they haven't communicated downwards. I think the amount of people, the circle of. of trust at city. The amount of people who knew this was happening was extremely small. We're talking on the very, very top of the club. Obviously, they've got lots and lots of employees lower down,

but I think there's even quite senior employees, not necessarily household names, but senior employees who weren't in the loop on it, and I think that may only be changing kind of as we speak or in the last hour or so. So it was very much external from that, really. All right. And from your discussion,

with them over the years, and this has been going on years, what did they have in place for if this was going to go the way it has today? Even though they were firmly of the belief that it wasn't going to go this way, as we understand it. Yeah, well, it's interesting because on the one hand, a few weeks after the hearing finished, which was December 2024, so in a few weeks after that in January 2025, Harlan signed that nine and a half, half year contract that month they spent about 175 million on new players because that was when their season was really kind of falling off a cliff and so they had to kind of inject funds so then

publicly it's like well this seems like they're very confident and the world's not going to end and then it's all gone on for so long you forget and they they spend more money in the summer to rebuild the squad because players have left and all this kind of thing um and you know guadillo's left and new managers come in um but behind the scenes i I know last year, they wanted to reduce the wage bill. When DeBroner left and Gundwin left and Edison left, they didn't want to refill the wage bill, as it were, when those big earners left.

Like budgets behind the scenes, I don't know, I don't know if they were cut, but they certainly shrank. It's not like there's always loads of money in every department, but they're obviously a very wealthy club, but suddenly they were kind of cutting their cloth a bit more accordingly, which I suppose you could read into, was them just preparing for an event. eventuality, I want to say like this,

but it just seems so much more serious than any of us ever imagined. And it does, I know, like Rory said, like City of strenuously denied this, but also the way that they got the Champions League ban overturned. Do you remember that Friday night in February 2020 when they got banned from the Champions League? And everyone was carrying on exactly like this.

The world's ending. They're definitely guilty, throw them out. Over the next few days, City will hold on a minute, we're going to appeal this. Guardioli did a press conference, and suddenly it's like, oh, maybe they've, maybe they're okay and then you know in july or whatever it was they overturned it maybe that the way that that went does marry up with how much they've strengthened was that strongly was

denied it over the years and yeah they i think they have been preparing because they're not stupid they are like a very clever business but i i i don't know if they ever saw something of this magnitude coming what do you think it it means even before we get to to an appeal What do you think this decision, these decisions mean in terms of city's relationship with the Premier League? Relationship maybe with some of the other clubs. I mean, as we've highlighted, the last line of their statement today shows the path they could well be taking. Yeah, there's definitely a lot to read between those lines. And, yeah, I'm of the same opinion.

They seem to be claiming that, you know, they've actually. properly and maybe the others haven't. The more you think about it, the more you talk about it, the bigger it gets, it's like a bottomless pit of hell, basically, which is your social media clip taking care. That's a phrase that hasn't been used yet, so we'll add that to our little. Bottomless pit of hell.

Like Stefan was saying, you know, like does Marcus Rashford sue because his earnings didn't go up because of the years they weren't in the Champions League, which it could be argued because of city. It just gets bigger and bigger. How far does it want to go? Do Emirates at Arsenal sue? Because the value of their sponsorship is somehow diminished

in a way that they could possibly argue. In terms of the relationship with the Premier League, the other clubs especially, I think, they would just be absolutely delighted about this. It'll be interesting to see how they all sit around the same boardroom table. But I think just the atmosphere of Premier League games is just going to be toxic. All of them.

The Manchester Derby in January, I think it was just because City had signed, maybe Mark Gehie a couple of days before that for a lot of money and a lot of wages. And I think that kind of stoked up the United fan sentiment of, hold on a minute, you've got these charges hanging over you, what's going on, you're buying these players.

And there was a real edge in the stadium that day. Like, we know what you are, those kind of chance. There was a real edge to it that day. And there was a little bit, well, there's quite a bit of it in the Derby just gone as well. But I think it's not just going to be United. It's not just going to be the rivals. It's going to be everywhere.

City going to Liverpool next. I was going to say, their first, Their first away game, that's the first game after, when does this end? 11th of October, the first game after the international break is Liverpool away. And like, with a lot of things in football, in life, the 11th of October sounds quite far away. You know, things can blow over. I don't, this isn't going to blow over. It just isn't.

It's going to hang around. And, yeah, they are obviously in a very difficult position for the reasons out. over the last 15 minutes or so dare I say longer but you know I mentioned Guardiola came out and did the press conference he did a few of those over the years and it'd always be like a good voice for the club and fight the corner and he would even if you didn't agree with him he put out a different perspective they don't really have that spokesperson anymore I don't know who would go into bat in this situation you know this is obviously a strategy they can have to work out is

that going to be Calduna Mabarak the chairman who comes and does that is it going to be Fransoriano can they leave it to Enzo Maresca I don't really think so but in In terms of, yeah, the relationship with the Premier League, as long as they're in it, because, you know, again, that's on the table. It's incredibly difficult. And fans from other clubs, they're not going to let it go. And fans will do that within stadiums. We know that.

And as you say, it will increase that animosity. Do you think it will affect City commercially? Again, this is one of those things. We realize how enormous this is, but I don't think we can fully grasp. enormity of it because it's not just, oh, maybe they have been found guilty of this, which we didn't necessarily think it was going to happen. And so what does that mean? Does that mean that it's not just, you know, a sporting sanction, but it goes beyond that

to the process of doing their accounts and corporate fraud and this kind of thing. And then as Rory was mentioning with the ownership, you know, does that affect like the value of the project, the value of their kind of asset in Abu Dhabi? And then does that affect their ability to bring in sponsors, but not just from them, but the ones around the world, they did a sponsorship deal with Kellogg's recently. And it's like a major, like, British institutions going to want to be involved with this now

because, you know, if it does keep going down this line and there's statements coming out confirming the cheating, if, like Stefan said before, the 700 words, like slamming city's conduct during the hearing and for the last 10, 15 years, that's going to really, really tarnished

them and it's definitely easy to imagine without being able to grasp the full enormity of it, it's definitely easy to imagine companies thinking we might not want you to put us on around your hoardings on the front of the shirt. Rory, it looked like you were coming in. I was just wondering whether Kellogg's

British or American. I was assumed it was American, but I might be wrong. I just always drive past the big factory in Manchester just feels very, very... Globalisation stuff is terrible. No, I think that's right. I think there will be a commitment. Again, if, presuming that the kind of verdict stands, if it's appealed and the appeal are successful, then that's two minutes, then that changes it, although I do wonder whether there's a reputational damage that will be, that will last whatever happens from this point on.

I think there's probably, there is probably some sort of reputational blowback for city, regardless of what happens. But I think there will be a commercial impact. One thing the Premier Leeds always been really good at is converting everything into a storyline. it manages to take quite a lot of controversies and make them part of the drama so that we can kind of accept it. I'm not sure you can do that with this because it does call into question

so many, kind of so much of the last 15, 16 years, it does kind of cast a shadow at the very least. It does call into question what might be happening, what might happen in years to come. And the other thing that I think is really important is that you potentially are taking moments away from people that if the verdict sounds

you've got caveat everything then it's not enough to you know if you strip city of the titles which I don't think is that likely but you strip city of the titles even if you were to then give Jose Marino his Premier League winner's medal he doesn't get the moment that he would have had

otherwise the fans don't get the moment that they would have had otherwise and that is that's kind of not what football should be about if you speak to Olympians who get their medals 10 years later. You know,

that's not the set, you know, your silver medal comes through the post is not, is not really what it's meant to be about. And I think that, that will,

will cast a pall over a lot of things for a long, long time. Do you think the owners would think, what's the point? From a,

from a, we've done, you know, and we can often say this with City, if you've just part one side of it, you know, they've come in,

they've regenerated an area, there's, you know, et cetera, et cetera, they've done a lot for that part of the city. Do you think they will think, well, what's the point? Look, I don't know.

It's like, again, the more you talk about it, the more you realize the thought of Jose Marino's next press conference. Every time you think of something else, it just gets bigger, there's another strand of it you've not realized. In terms of the ownership of Manchester City, will they pull the plug and walk away from it? Who knows? But again, these are the kind of questions

that we can like validly talk about at this point. Everything is on the table. That's how deep it goes. It's not just, you know, we'll... The days of, oh, maybe they'll just get off with a fine, as people would say, along gone. Now it's will the owners walk out. Instinctively, I would say no.

Instinctively, I would say that defiance will kind of continue and it maybe becomes part of the story. Let's say there's relegations. It's like, right, well, we're going to come back, we're going to be stronger, we're going to build, we're going to do it this way and we're going to stand by you maybe that's how they do it. But instinctively that's the way I would go. But these are the kind of big questions that we're going to have to wrestle with.

And obviously I've not wrestle with that one quite enough. Let's talk to a couple of Manchester City fans. Matt Mellar and Peter Clayton are with us. Matt's first city match was at Main Road when he was six years old. Peter is 19. So this era of success is all he's ever known. So sort of two differing experiences of, of Manchester City over the years.

I mean, I hate asking this question, but it's the only one that I can start with, Matt, which is how are you feeling? After listening to that for the past. Well, I can't imagine that particularly helped, but I apologise for that. It's not, no, no, I think I need therapy now, Chaffers.

I mean, it is just escalated over the last couple of hours, you know? We know this has been investigated, and it's just so hard as a die-hard blue that like I say at six years old was in the Kippax at main road to see in the iguero moments that absolutely changed the way that the Premier League would be won in terms of within those dying minutes dying seconds you know the way that we've we've had the success and to sort of think that now obviously the decision is made yet we haven't appealed it we haven't come out really with a statement yet there'll be you know this club I just want to say

and you alluded to it there chapters before where you said it has changed the city. The way that city has run in terms of with the fans, they haven't put up the prices of season tickets, the way that it's very community focused as well, I do a lot of work in the community and it is superb for the local schools.

The way it's been run in terms of for the fans and the sheer elation I have seen over the years and experience that with my dad and those memories, I'm sorry, and I'll speak for probably other city fans here. You can't take them away. Back in Division 2 when Paul Dickoff scored and got us up from the second division,

I was there that day. And at one point, I was like, what is going on here? We're throwing it away. We came back. And Nikki Weaver was the hero that day, Paul Dickoff as well. And we celebrated that success,

having been in the shadow of our neighbours for so many years. And we have gone on and done incredible things in terms of for the Premier League, the way that Pet Guadiola has inspired other managers to play out from the back. The way that we've brought in players

that have been incredible and made it, we were a team of absolute formidable force and turning over teams because we're playing so well. Now, if you take away, obviously, how that's happened with regards to this fair play in terms of financial, I still have those memories of just sheer,

like, amazement of what I was witnessing. And therefore, sorry, Matt. Just to jump in, No, no, no, no, no. I was just going to say, though, while Stefan's point is valid that defiance may not be the best approach when it comes to the corridors of power and actually dealing with this amongst the execs,

would, I mean, I think I know the answer to this already, but would you expect your fellow supporters to be defiant here? A hundred and ten percent. We have a song. we're going down with them billion in the bank. We have all these songs, right? And it's, we will be defiant. We will show if we get those,

if we get titles taken off us, point deductions, and we come out of this league, we will fight till the very end. It's one of our saying city fight till the end, and the fans will get behind that team. And I can't wait to see Erwin Hall and bag a hat trick against Grimsby or Lester that season.

Like, you know, joking aside, we will stick by our team. because this is what it's about. You go through the good times, you go through the hard times, and we have been on such a high over the years. But if it does turn out how we don't want it to as city fans, I certainly, and I know a lot of my friends who are city fans,

will stick by them, and we will get back to where we need to be. Now, how does that look for the Premier League? Because, yes, it's going to be very hostile, and we have to go to Liverpool, which is never a nice place to go anyway. It's the first away game. but it's going to be very interesting now

as how we react. Like when it's the Champions League and we boo when the anthem comes on well how are the fans now going to react with the Premier League as well? And I was thinking that at Matt actually. I was thinking it's all very well doing it every sort of three weeks for the Champions League

then it'll be quite interesting around the Premier League. Peter, all you've known is success really as a city fan. So what are you expecting now? I think it's an interesting and a difficult one, so we don't know what the punishment will be, right? Like, City could end up in the National League,

but equally, City could stay in the Premier League, and it might just be like a slap on the wrist. So I think you can't really answer that question without knowing the punishment. But I think the ownership of almost taking a trade-off, if that makes sense. So I think if you don't break the rules initially,

are city ever in the position we are now, probably not. And even if, say, city get relegated to, League one, League two, I think the infrastructure's there, like Matt says, that you've got Olin Harlan playing against Grimsby, right? If Holland leaves, you've got the academy players playing against Grimsby, who are brilliant right. I think it's inevitable. We come back. So in 10 years time, no matter what happens, I think City are probably in a stronger position than we would have been if you didn't initially break the rules. And obviously morally, there's issues there.

And you can debate that. It's not right. But these guys only care about winning and they have won. And I think they'll win more in the future because of what they've done. And therefore, I think you could argue it's a correct decision despite being morally wrong. If you, what for you would be an ideal punishment then? Just a financial punishment, Peter? From a perspective of a Man City fan, yeah, that'd be great, right? Because you stay there. But from a perspective of a football fan, like the right thing is probably that

man city get pushed down divisions, divisions, divisions or some sort of punishment that will have a lasting effect because you could give us a big points deduction, right? We'll go down to the championship, we'll come straight back up and the infrastructure we've built from cheating is still there. So we'll be okay.

And therefore, are any of your, if it is proved, and you use the word cheating there, but if some of this is proved, is any of it tainted for you? I think from a club perspective, right, it's got to be slightly tainted. No, for you, is it? Because you...

As a fan, is it? I'd always describe myself as a football fan more than like a club and a culture guy. So I'd still see the Centurion's team, for example, as the best team of all time because of the footballing level

they achieved. But I think from a fan and culture perspective, like objectively it has to be tainted because you've objectively broke rules to get there. Okay, Peter, thank you. Matt, a final one to you.

If this was another club in this situation, What would you want to happen to them? Oh, great question. If we have broken rules, there's going to be consequences and sanctions. And financially, we'll just sell a load more oil, let's be honest, right? Shape Monter, we'll just put out the check. But if we are removed from the league, we will come back stronger.

So I think for another team, look at Everton, look at Sheffield, United, you know, there were sanctions in place. And I think, again, you just have to, if you've done wrongdoing, you have to face your consequence. And, yeah, unfortunately, you know, what will be will be. But final point, we will fight till the end and also get behind our team. Because look how we've started this season, the Moreska.

Look at the signings, the sales that we did and the players that we brought in have been superb. And we're really going to give a challenge to Arsenal. But I'm sure our tech. is sat there with his glass of nice Ryoka, sat back, enjoying this, what he's unfolding at the moment. Matt, thank you very much.

Take care. Matt and Peter, both city fans. I mean, there would be an argument, Sam, that it could fire them up for the rest of the... People keep going, well, what's next, what's next? Actually, for this group of players, you've got nothing to do with what's gone on in the past, it could fire them up. And Moreska, actually...

Yeah, I think if Moreska's clever and uses it that way, I genuinely think when the Chargers came out in February 20, 23, it did galvanise them and helped them win the treble. I genuinely do believe that. I think it's fairly evident, to be fair. They were in a difficult spot, but it kind of united the team when they needed it. Maybe they do that this time.

I hadn't actually thought about them kicking a ball. Yeah, we'll get back to that in a few weeks, I suppose. Sam, thank you for joining Sam Lee from the Athletic. Rory, are we still going to be talking about this in two years, if both of us are still contracted at the time? I mean, that's equally a big question. equally a big question. That's the bidder issue, Jeffers.

I mean, I think there's every chance. I mean, Dale, I think, and Stefan as well kind of made the point that it's, we're all guessing to put timeframes on it. Ideally, no, we wouldn't be, but I think there's a decent chance that, as I say, I think I think City will appeal it for as long as they can possibly appeal it. And that takes time. The one thing, I thought both Peter and Matt were really interesting in their perspectives. The one thing that I think is missing, you can't tell fans how to behave. And I'm conscious of, like, Yuvay, who had title.

pulled off them in Italy for Calciopoli they insist that they are their titles I can't remember it's 28 or 30 that their banners in the in the in the in the curvers will have all of those titles on them into insist that they are their titles

like they are contested effectively so that is the nature of fans to as as Matt said I think to stick with your team to be defiant well that's what you do that's what you do isn't it but I would say I would say and I think that's absolutely right they should whatever happens. They should like continue to support Manchester City

as vehemently as they always have. The people who run the club are not the club. I think that is something that is really important to mention that if this is proven, people did it. Manchester City as an institution didn't do it because Manchester City is a business. The business itself is run by people.

It's okay to support your team whilst also directing your ire at the people who have damaged that team's name. think that is a difficult thing to internalise. And like if the club that I support got done for something, I don't know, I don't know, I'd necessarily be able to do it myself. But I think it is, there is a separation between the club itself and the people who run the club, because it's the latter that you can support the team

while still criticising the latter. Sam Lee from the Athletic, Rory Smith from The Observer. Thank you very much for being with us. This is the football story of the century. It's pandemonium, it's ecstasy. authoritarian regime. For the past 15 years, English football has been dominated by Manchester City. They are champions again, but not only that, they've won it four years running, and no one's done that, ever. Then the Premier League dropped a bombshell. The Premier League has charged

Manchester City with more than 100 breaches of its financial rules following a four-year investigation. Somebody turned up at the Hetty Had Stadium and effectively served papers. Hear the in-depth analysis and explanation with football on trial. Manchester City charges. Listen on BBC Sounds. You're listening to the Football Daily podcast with Matt Chapman. Football finance expert, Stefan Borson, is still with a senior football reporter. Ian Dennis joins us.

I've just had a text from a friend of mine, a massive football fan, that simply says, Ian, your discussion tonight is strangely frightening. And I think I know what he means by that. Well, yeah, because we still don't know what's going to happen, do we? And we don't know what the ramifications are going to be. Because as you've been talking about for the last hour, it is unprecedented. You know, and I've seen rival supporters on social media call for titles to be stripped. But I'm actually not aware of any parallels, because when I've heard people mention Juventus,

Juventus were actually stripped of the two titles due to match fixing, likewise Marseille, for their title in 92, 93. and then I was actually looking at English clubs who have faced previous punishments for misdemeanors and two really sprang to mind Luton Town who were hit with a record points deduction 30 points in 0809 but 10 of those were for making irregular payments and another 20 for failing to satisfy the EFL insolvency rules

and if you recall Swindon Town who thought they'd got promoted to the top flight in 1990 were ultimately faced with a one one-season demotion for making illegal payments to players. So the sanctions, whenever they are decided, are going to be absolutely fascinating because there is no precedent. Stefan, can I just widen it out? And we've had discussions before about financial fair play, squad cost rules, PSR,

UEFA have one ruling, Premier League do something else, rules in the championship are different to League 1, which are different to the National League. Do you look at it all, given all of your experience and think, how has football got itself into this mess? Well, I think there's two things that we need to just understand. First of all, that the regulation around the game is probably for the best overall in some form. Secondly, the things that City seem to have actually

done and the breaches that are appear to have been confirmed are far beyond football regulation. Yes, there are subsequent breaches and consequential breaches of the PSRs and the licensing regime with the

UEFA. But even if there were no rules, you can't go around faking contracts, faking agreements, a registering revenue that was never are actually generated in your actual accounts, none of those things are permitted,

even if you have no football regulation. So I don't think this is, this is not about football regulation having gone wrong. This is about wrongdoing by the club of matters that would be breaches in any scenario and with any set of rules, even if there wasn't any at all. Which I suppose is similar to, I mean, again,

this is unprecedented. But I suppose is similar to what Chelsea did then, and that they were clear breaking of regulations. Yeah, yeah. And the difference here and the reason why it's likely to be approached in a more severe way is because Chelsea admitted it. Now, there may be circumstances why it was sensible for Chelsea to admit it, largely because they bought the business with that in mind.

They bought it with the benefit of £150 million of effectively underwritten, losses so they were they were less worried about the consequences but the fact of the matter is city have denied this this stuff for a generation frankly and have gone through a process that's ended up costing let's say 100 million pounds against the premier league they've denied denied denied they presumably have put witnesses up in the hearing itself who have said things that this independent commission have not believed they believe them to have been less than credible And that's putting it nicely. So this is much worse in the Chelsea situation,

not because the underlying matters are not similar, because they are. Because if you read the Premier League's sanction agreement with Chelsea, it talks about deception, it talks about concealment, it talks about literally sham agreements. So the underlying matters, yes, they're the same, but City haven't admitted it.

City have denied and denied and denied. And that means when it goes to a sanction hearing, they're going to be in a far worse position because they don't have any mitigation and they do have a lot of aggravating factors that the Premier League are going to have to push in front of the Independent Commission and say, therefore,

cities should be very heavily and severely punished. Stefan, could I ask you a question, please, because of the 115 charges, seven are for breaching the Premier League's PSR. And I've seen this argument from Evan and supporters on social media that they've pointed out that why did they get points deducted immediately, yet City go to appeal? Because in 23, 24, both Everton and Forrest were hit with points deduction. Everton, 10 points, reduced to six on

appeal, a further two points on a second charge. Forrest deducted the four points. And I think many supporters will be asking, where is the consistency? Yeah, well, the first thing is, Everton admitted the breaches. So that's a different straight away. the question of the breach wasn't in question by the end of it. And the same with Nottingham Forest. The question was about the scale of the sanction. It will be a reason in which when we go to the next stage, the Premierly probably will say that it's not right that city get the opportunity

to appeal the sanction, sorry, the liability, i.e. whether they did it first and wait for the punishment down the road. And that actually in the same way that you just explained, that the sanction hearing should occur, the punishment should be put in place. There may well be an asterisk that says we are going through the appeals process in the same way that occurred with the other clubs. So that may well be an argument.

But we shouldn't sort of confuse the number of breaches with the other cases. I think 1-15 and the sort of each individual charge really hides a number of different categories of charge. I doubt that city actually have literally been found to have breached 114 of the 115. I suspect that what's happened is one of the areas and probably one of the less significant areas. That hasn't been proved, but actually the bulk of it has been proved. But the bulk of the punishment is going to come from two areas. One, it will be the material sponsorship exaggerations or potentially sham contracts. and secondly from the fundamental breaches of PSR,

which has been seen in football regulation to be the most serious thing. And each of those individually will have to lead to points deductions in the way that that has operated historically. On that first one, Stefan, on the sponsorship deals and so on and so forth, as things stand, if there wasn't an appeal, but if Manchester City are found guilty, is this a victory for, and this is what some people will say, a victory for the traditional old big clubs

who the perception is have done everything in their power to stop the clubs with new money being successful. And I'm sure Newcastle may feel that, Villa may feel that, Chelsea felt that in the past, although they got a lot through before rules were changed. Is that how it will be perceived, do you think? Well, City might try and push that argument. I think the reality is it's not acceptable. If this is what has happened, it's not acceptable to go around effectively creating contracts

that are put in place purely as an artificial mechanism to move money around. I mean, that's just not the way things are done. It's not acceptable. And whether you like the rules or not, those are the rules. So would it be a victory for the other clubs in terms of putting in place restrictions? Well, potentially. But I think it's largely beside the point

because cities shouldn't have done it if they have done it and shouldn't have been effectively denied it all this way. They should have found a way to hold their hands up at some point in the past, if that was the case. Look, we are slightly in the dark

because we haven't got the actual decision and we don't actually know what the findings are. But if it is as bad as we think, I think arguments about, well, we didn't like the rules. I think they're poor arguments. You know, ultimately, that the Premier League rules are agreed by the Premier League clubs. And you might like them or you might not, but you have to adhere to them. And that's just the way it works. Let's bring in a couple of other fans of other clubs here.

So Neil Atkinson from the Amfield rap from a Liverpool perspective, Scott Saunders from the Promise Land podcast from a Manchester United perspective. we talked earlier, Neil, about City's next game is the 11th of October at Anfield. Will it crank that atmosphere up even more? I suspect it will, but there's, I mean, there's tons and tons of oddities here, aren't they? You know, I think the wider sort of context, of course, that atmosphere would be, you know, it would be up anyway, but it'll be up even more off the back of this. But the strangeness of it is, we are dealing with the sides who are where they are,

because of what they built during this period that's been now from the sound of things and I think Stefan's tone there was absolutely spot on in a number of different ways by the way and I think it's worthy of that being acknowledged by someone who's not from the city of Manchester his tone there about what's acceptable and what's not acceptable is absolutely spot on

also within that I think that the idea of where there is or isn't or can or can't be good faith is massive here and for me this isn't a matter of points deductions for me this is a matter of expulsion Manchester City don't look as though they can be treated as a good faith partner within the Premier League and the oddity is

Manchester City could beat Liverpool at Amfield they're more than capable of doing it. They did it last season and they could then be on 18 points six out of six top of the Premier League when we could be going through a process that could lead to at some point then being expelled from the Premier League

I'm not saying that this is easily unnottered by the way I think you've got to respect the time that's actually being taken and the seriousness with which this has been gone about rather than be glib or flip you see a lot of that on social media. There's a lot of glibbiness around, even now, even today. I always thought that it was a massive gamble

and a brave move from the Premier League to launch so many charges. And if they have been vindicated by the findings of the Independence Inquiry, which it looks like they have, then we end up in a situation now where what it does do is actually taints the Premier League's own product for the foreseeable future. You know, there's every chance, I don't know,

Arsenal, I think I've got Leeds at home, next game back, let's say Leeds, manage to scrape a draw, city winner, and all of a sudden, these characters are sick of points clear. and everyone will be going, well, how's that happened? But then, Neil, that's a really interesting point on the length of the process and the due process to get to where they are. And I completely understand and get your point of view on that,

that it had to be as thorough as possible and taken as seriously as possible. But what nobody can have, because this is what you've alluded to here, if an appeal process starts, you can't, the competition, cannot allow a lengthy appeals process. Can it? Because of just that example that you've mentioned. Yeah, and this is why the idea that there are comparisons to Evan and Nottingham Forest, they're completely false.

This is so much more serious. And as Stefan says, you know, this is about fraudulent behaviour by a club at the very highest level. It's not the same as pushing the PSR rules. It just isn't. That might come in. That might be a factor that comes out. And what's hard in amongst all of this is we haven't seen the written report yet.

And the other thing we all need to be careful of, Stefan said this himself in the past. When we see the written report, it is going to be one long report. And anyone who says to you that they've got a quick analysis on it, that person is not to be trusted. But within this, where we now find ourselves is the competition has to be ongoing. Now, there's every chance first game back after all. Their city turn up and they're 100 mile an hour. We're going to see this through. But it might be if this is dragging on in three months time and no one quite knows if they're going to be allowed to finish the season, let alone lift a

trophy at the end of it because there could be points deductions. It could be a different Manchester City that everyone's playing. What this is doing, and this is why the Premier League is being brave and I think should be, its bravery should actually be applauded. Because what it does do is it does actually on the whole product, and let's talk about it in that sense globally, what it does is it does put a big crack in the facade of the whole product for the foreseeable future. So do Ealing Harland's two goals to win two goals to one at Amfield count in three months

time. And as I say, I would genuinely be of the view. I genuinely think that I think points of, talk of points deduction to me is a little bit for the birds. So much of this is actually about whether or not you can trust an organisation is acting in good faith. And the way in which it's been

going on, and Stefan talks about aggravating factors. Those aggravating factors are as aggravating as ongoing in 2026 as they were in 2019. Stefan, could they just on the appeals process, could they put a limit on it, time limit on it.

Not under the rules, but I do think that we're going to get into a situation where, remember, city, in terms of this part of the process, they're going to be appealing to, not appealing as in the actual appeal, but they're going to be asking an independent commission on the next stage for certain positions on things like publication or whether they themselves are biased, of all these things. The independent commission is not with Manchester City right now. It is massively against Manchester City. That is what its

findings appear to have concluded. That means they are getting very little from this commission. So they then have to try and find a way around the fact that we still haven't had the

sanction agreement, which might flow straight away. If that does, that is going to some time for people to have the time to digest the findings. That cannot be a quick process. So even if the independent commission says they're not playing ball with City wanting to have an appeal now and then come back to sanction and then have an appeal later, even if it goes against City, it's still not quick.

So, you know, I'm afraid we're in a zone where all of the things that Neal's just spoken about are just the reality. We are just going to have to cope now for quite some time with quite a lot of uncertain and unacceptable sporting implications, I'm afraid. Scott, where are you with all of this from a United perspective? Well, first of all, when I saw the news come out, I couldn't believe it. We waited so long. It's been such a long time that this has been, you know, in the pipeline and, you know, there was the UEFA case before that as well. I think initially I was

kind of relieved that we had a verdict finally and in the hour since I've been thinking about United and the ramifications. We've talked about mist titles. You know, there's the Aguerogall in 2012 that won the league for City that day ahead of United or at Sunderland. But I've been thinking

in the hours after, like it's really been sinking in of how deep this actually goes beyond even Manchester United because all these charges and the They date back to 2009, obviously. So it was from essentially the inception of when Man City became the Manchester City that we know and all of the foundations that they put in place during those years

in order to get to the point that we're at now and the point that they have been at for the last few years. I mean, I'm just interested to see how this is going to unfold. I've got to be honest. I think the words expulsion has just been mentioned. Is that serious? This is unprecedented. unlike anything that we've ever seen. I can't get my head around it.

The more I think about it, the more I think of, well, was there a team that got relegated by a point that lost to Manchester City in one season, you know? Yeah, and exactly. That's how deep you wonder, I mean, that's why the phrase all hell all break loose has cropped up many times this evening. When you say expel, Neil, going back to that word,

From where to where? From the Premier League and then what league, what will league will take them and let them apply? The AFL might say now, there'll be sides in the AFL who are in the AFL or have competed with Manchester City in this period who are now EFL clubs and they might not be comfortable. So it might be re-entering the NFL at the bottom of league too.

It might be re-entering the National League. It is the idea of be expelled from the Premier League. you are not allowed to participate in Premier League football. You need to go and start again from the bottom. But the canter worms are everywhere, marking amongst all of this. And, you know, I think that it's also worth pointing out. I mean, Manchester City is part of all this. They literally play in a stadium that is rented to them by Manchester City Council.

You know, Manchester itself has given over a lot of property from the City Council to UAE-based companies in the last 12, 14, 15, 16 years. and across the board really here I mean my general life position is there are periods of quiet reflection from the city of Manchester have been no bad thing but many of the positions

that have been taken that have come out across the city of Manchester from many people in positions of power institutional power in the city of Manchester have been to close ranks and now and again we don't have it all in writing

we don't have it all with clarity at all but now it would appear as though and this is why it is so serious and why it's important. It's been done with complete thoroughness. Because as Stefan has said, this is not about pushing the boundaries of football rules.

This is about acting and choosing to act in a fraudulent way and then refusing to hold your hands up at any stage and acting as though, no, might will be right, we will win out. And that's clearly also in the background of what's gone on with UEFA as well. Does the reporter quote of,

we will spend this much money on lawyers before we pay anything to UEFA. This attitude, as I say, it's one which I think has been there culturally and it is a significant problem. And it is one that needs to be reflected on in a number of different areas across, I'd argue, British public life.

We should not have reached this point. You know, there's a reason why certain organisations' entities shouldn't be allowed to buy football clubs. You know, and we can, if you want, I'm more than happy to throw some glare at Liverpool in this. We've reached this point and it's a real error. And I wonder, like, which is kind of what I asked Stefan,

a little bit earlier, whether if you were going to look at football, maybe we're all too long in the tooth of this, but you're going to look at football as a whole and go, is this the moment that it resets? But I think I'm too long in the tooth

and too cynical to think that that would happen, really. I think that there's been, so for instance it doesn't appear as though there's any sort of comparative wrongdoing at Newcastle to what we can see at Manchester City at this stage and that's not come over. because I think what's been clearer and clearer is that the regulations have got more and more real and began to have greater and greater bite.

Football has always to me seems as though it's constantly behind the curve. And I think it still is. Like I think for instance, there's not been enough reportage, commentary or analysis of the risk of something like the Mitterl family and Bezos choosing to take a global brand like Liverpool. What would happen if they chose to push that envelope? We've all sort of glossed over that and instead just gone a big shiny Jeff Bezos is an all a bit weird thing. rather than actually ask the question, do we actually need regulation to be tighter?

My argument is that we do. And we need to really make sure that football clubs are only ever spending what they themselves earn because the last thing anyone wants is a turbo-charged Liverpool. And that's a good place to end that then, Neil. Thank you very much for coming on,

as ever appreciate it. Thank you, Scott, as well. Do you think it could lead to increased regulation, Stefan? I doubt it. I think we are actually pretty heavily regulated now. I mean, maybe people haven't yet seen the activity of the independent football regulator, but it is empowered. It does have a vast remit.

And I would imagine that we are not going to get more and more regulation. I think there is lots of signs that actually the systems that are in place are actually working, regardless of what might have happened 10 years ago in Manchester City. I mean, the fact that we are in this position right now suggests that those governance processes have at least done their job to find the wrongdoing and to be brave in prosecuting it. I think there's elements of self-sabotage from a commercial perspective,

but they've done it very bravely, and that's where we are now. Okay, I just want to end talking to BBC business correspondent, Sean Farrington. Just about, in the main here, Sean. and actually Premier League reputation as a global brand, which I think somebody mentioned earlier. Brand obviously is what it is. Yeah.

Do you think it's got work to do here? It could be the defining setup for the next few years of what the Premier League is all about. Often when you hear me wanging on in the morning about more boring things than this when it comes to regulation, it's about defining what you want to be as an industry or as a company, how do we want our water supplies to be done, all of that kind of stuff.

And so when they're weighing up, you know, this commission is weighing up. There'll be lots of things they're weighing up. They'll be looking at, you know, how strong are they holding the integrity of the lead in the next league in the next few years? I was looking at the broadcasting rights. They're up again in the next couple of years for renegotiation domestically, internationally. If there's no Manchester city in there,

they've been a tenth of the revenues at the Premier League over the last few years. if there's no man city in there, how much of a difference does that make versus saying to the rest of the world, we are not afraid to take huge action against one of the biggest clubs. So it is massive, the ripple effect, whether it is the broadcasters right around the world. Our own government, you know, Andy Burnham was mayor of Greater Manchester for the last decade in which, you know,

many questions have either been asked about city or that investment into East Manchester has really sort of dominated that part of the, of the, the northwest. So yeah, I mean, the ripple effects go far and wide. And the fact, I think the thing of what we know, the thing that jumped out for me is no settlement. Quite often, you'll hear of some settlement when these things come about. And we're not hearing that word at all yet. So whatever comes next, feels like it's going to be big. Sean, thank you very much. Sean Farrington, BBC Business Correspondent. And that's the thing,

I suppose, Stefan, finally, isn't it? It's how the Premier League not market this, but, you know, look, we're strong, we can take action against one of our own, but what they don't then want is their competition descending into far, so if this drags on and on and on and on. Yeah, it's a real battle for them now, I have to say, you know, there will be some celebration at Premier League towers, I'm sure, because they will feel the best of the worst cases that they win the case. But now they've got to deal with the fallout,

and the fallout is not easy to contain, as we've talked about for hours tonight. I think talk of a settlement is really very, very difficult to see, because how does city get to a settlement? They would have to admit everything. Then there would have to be an agreement that was capable of being endorsed by the same independent commission that has already apparently found against them very, very heavily. And it's just very hard to see how that situation, could pan out without city really taking on a punishment that I just don't believe there's any

possibility they would. So I think we are, unfortunately, we are in for a period of quite a lot of instability, a lot of infighting and be that fighting of clubs against Manchester City. I think it's going to be a problem around all of the stadia, as we've talked about before. And I think the likelihood is that Manchester City will have to face legal action from many different quarters, I'm afraid. Staffan, appreciate your time and your insight this evening. Thank you very much for being with us. This is the football story of the century. It's pandemonium, it's ecstasy. It's an authoritarian regime. For the past 15 years, English football has been dominated by Manchester City. They are champions again, but not only that, they've won it four years running, and no one's done that.

ever. Then the Premier League dropped a bomb shell. The Premier League has charged Manchester City with more than 100 breaches of its financial rules

following a four-year investigation. Somebody turned up at the Hetty had stadium and effectively served papers. Hear the in-depth analysis and explanation with football on trial

the Manchester City charges. Listen on BBC Sounds. It felt like everything I believed in was suddenly collapsing. This is the story of an Islamic boarding school in Indonesia with a dark secret of the school's head teacher.

This was someone I respected above anyone else. And the investigation led by students, he's trying to silence. If this is leaked to the media, I'll be destroyed. This is World of Secrets, catching my teacher. Listen on BBC.com, the BBC app or wherever you get your BBC podcasts.