The Premier League’s landmark ruling has found Manchester City guilty of utilising sham contracts, submitting inaccurate financial accounts, and systematically failing to co-operate with the league’s multi-year inquiry.
Crucially, the independent panel found some of the key defence witnesses to be so lacking in credibility that their testimonies were effectively dismissed as outright falsehoods.
I’m not saying this with the benefit of hindsight, because it’s a point I’ve made several times before, but wasn’t it all a bit obvious?
The notion that Manchester City organically generated a higher commercial turnover than Manchester United defied logic.
Man U had spent over half a century accumulating vast global riches, extending its commercial empire during the success of the Ferguson era. For Manchester City to leapfrog that institutional wealth in a fraction of the time beggared belief.
At its core, Man City’s financial engineering was motivated by an attempt to level a structurally uneven playing field, and I think this prompts a deeper question as to what motivated them to act in they way they did.
For decades, English football has been dominated by a small, elite cartel. What Manchester City did was not merely level the playing field; they completely distorted it.
By misrepresenting an estimated almost £900 million, the club bypassed regulatory guardrails to help secure trophy after trophy.
Of course, this crisis is not isolated to domestic regulators.
Reports elsewhere claim that European football’s governing body, where Gianni Infantino was UEFA Secretary General from 2009 to 2016, was aware of these financial anomalies years ago. Instead of robust enforcement, UEFA allegedly turned a blind eye, such that this systemic failure raises uncomfortable, lingering questions not just for Manchester City, but for other state-backed giants, including back-to-back European champions Paris Saint-Germain and their Qatari ownership.
With guilt established, the focus shifts to the impending punishment if/when the appeal fails. To maintain the integrity of the game, the sanction must be draconian. The only fitting penalty is surely a forced relegation, something that will send Manchester City into freefall down the pyramid, providing the EFL is willing to entertain the notion of course.
What’s really interesting is when you make comparisons, whether that’s with Manchester United, with total debts of over a £billion, and yet still able to flex their financial muscle, or with Newcastle United, a club who haven’t cheated and yet still plundered their first trophy in a very long time, some 18 months ago.
And here is what’s so absurd.
The two Manchester clubs, both with owners whose scruples and integrity are highly questionable, but where one is able to act with impunity despite its dodgy looking balance sheet, whilst the other is about to have the book thrown at it.
Meanwhile, the repercussions for Newcastle United and its owners could be far reaching.
Nation states, particularly those of a Middle Eastern persuasion owning English football clubs isn’t going to be a terribly good look in the wake of this scandal and I wouldn’t bet against the Saudi Arabia PIF pulling out, either because the model those from Abu Dhabi adopted has been proven to have failed, or because the Premier League might just legislate to jettison them anyway.
That said, even in the wake of such a definitive ruling, geopolitics and money continue to cloud matters.
When the British Prime Minister publicly voices concern over the diplomatic fallout amidst Man City’s indiscretions, it reminds us that football is no longer just a sport, it is an instrument of international relations, perhaps leaving the final resolution of this scandal frustratingly uncertain.