Manchester City’s finding of guilt on every financial rule breach brought by the Premier League has triggered an international reaction, with media outlets questioning whether the club’s titles should remain intact and warning that English football may never view its dominant era in the same way.
An independent commission concluded that City used “sham” contracts between 2009 and 2018 to inflate revenue and reduce costs by between £830m and £900m. The club was also found guilty of hiding financial arrangements, breaching spending limits and repeatedly obstructing the league’s investigation.
The Premier League has described the case as the most significant disciplinary process in its history. City have rejected the verdict as a “conspiracy theory” and will appeal, with the deadline for lodging that appeal set for 2 October. A separate hearing will decide the punishment, which could include fines, points deductions, other sporting sanctions, relegation or the removal of titles.
The South China Morning Post in Hong Kong called City potentially “the biggest cheats the sporting world has ever seen”, comparing the case with the removal of Ben Johnson’s Olympic gold and Lance Armstrong’s seven Tour de France titles. It also questioned whether the Premier League could continue to claim to be the world’s best domestic competition while broadcasters, including Sky Sports, pay about £1.3bn a year for a product whose legitimacy is now disputed.
Italy’s La Gazzetta dello Sport described the verdict as “a huge victory for the English league”, arguing that it showed the Premier League could enforce its rules. However, it said the competition’s reputation had already suffered and warned that City’s future as a global club could be at risk if they were expelled.
ESPN in the United States focused on a passage in the commission’s decision stating there was no evidence that a redacted individual authorised the operation. It asked whether that person could be chairman Khaldoon Al-Mubarak or someone higher in Abu Dhabi’s hierarchy, potentially allowing City to pursue a settlement rather than another lengthy legal battle. Any agreement, ESPN said, would need to hurt the club both financially and in sporting terms.
FOX Sports Australia compared the situation with Melbourne Storm’s salary-cap scandal in the NRL, when titles were removed and no champion was awarded. It said City supporters who had watched the club rise from the third tier in the late 1990s to become a Premier League power had been “duped”.
The National in the United Arab Emirates gave prominence to City’s response that it was “disappointed and surprised” and described the club’s lack of co-operation as only “reported”. The newspaper was acquired by International Media Investments, owned and controlled by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan, who owns City through the Abu Dhabi United Group. He became owner in 2008, during the period covered by the breaches, and is the UAE’s vice-president and deputy prime minister.
German newspaper BILD called the decision “City’s full verdict of shame”, while Le Parisien in France said the club could “expect the worst”. Portugal’s A Bola suggested some supporters might leave, despite City having become Manchester’s leading club in money, players and trophies after years in Manchester United’s shadow.
Norwegian broadcaster Viaplay described the case as a “Lance Armstrong moment” and labelled the alleged conduct “financial doping”. India’s Times of India concentrated on Erling Haaland, saying he could seek a move if playing outside the Premier League conflicted with his ambitions.
South Africa’s Daily Maverick contrasted City’s case with Chelsea’s £10m fine for 74 breaches of Premier League agent regulations. Chelsea were praised for self-reporting and were found not to have gained a significant sporting advantage, circumstances it said did not appear to apply to City.
Chile’s La Tercera highlighted the possibility of titles being stripped, including the 2013-14 Premier League crown won under Manuel Pellegrini. Spain’s Mundo Deportivo concluded that, whatever the eventual punishment or outcome of the appeal, “an irreparable stain” and lasting suspicion would remain over City’s success.
