Manchester City have been found guilty of 114 of the 115 charges levied against them for breaches of Premier League financial rules, according to a report by the Athletic on Friday. The Premier League has yet to officially confirm the verdict, and City bosses have said the process remains ongoing.
Appeal expected as saga continues
City have always vehemently denied any wrongdoing and look certain to appeal any guilty verdict. That means, rather than reaching a neat conclusion, the saga could still drag on for a number of years. Due to the unprecedented volume of charges against the club, it is unknown how harsh a punishment may be placed upon them.
Potential punishments on the table
The Premier League has plenty of options on the table, ranging from financial fines and transfer bans to points deduction and, the nuclear option, expelling City from the top-flight altogether. There is also the possibility of City being stripped of the league titles won during the impacted years, while Premier League rivals consider legal action and compensation for a multitude of reasons they were affected.
In short, it's a mess that doesn't seem like it will be resolved shortly. But rather than dodge red tape, appeals and legal concerns, Mirror Football writers have offered their views on how City should be punished, if the guilty verdict is upheld.
Writers weigh in on punishment
John Cross said the scale of the case is unprecedented, and so it has to be a punishment to match. He suggested a points deduction which would see City relegated, plus a transfer ban and a fine to make a real difference. He added he doesn't think there's a will from other clubs to see them stripped of titles, and he's not sure that's such a great idea, noting the fans are innocent in this. He also pointed out that if City were expelled, the EFL are not obliged to take them, and an appeal could drag on once lawyers get involved.
Ben Husband argued that stripping them of the titles won sets a really dangerous precedent, and it also means the Premier League are essentially accepting years of their product didn't matter. He said a points deduction, and a big one, feels like the most likely outcome, and it should be severe enough to reflect the breaches. He suggested the cleanest resolution is a big points deduction put in place at the start of a league campaign.
Daniel Orme said he doesn't think stripping Man City of their titles is the way to go, as the allegations taint them, but City still won those trophies and nobody realistically wants to be retrospectively awarded them. He said a fine doesn't really do much, and the only way to go is either a massive points deduction or relegation, potentially even both, as these punitive measures are meant to serve as a warning to other clubs.
Dan Burnham said if you cheated to win titles, you don't deserve to keep them, but equally those who finished runners-up don't deserve to inherit them either. He said fining one of the world's richest clubs is pointless, and they need sanctions that will actually rock them, which has to be at the very least an unprecedented points deduction that all but guarantees relegation and a transfer ban.
Abbie Meehan noted that Noel Gallagher makes the point that the players won the trophies on the pitch and were not directly involved in boardroom behaviour, but the question is whether these players would have been on the pitch had it not been for the rule breaches. She suggested a fair punishment would be an insurmountable fine and a points deduction to deter other sides from taking the risk.
Tom Sunderland said if Man City's rap sheet isn't the straw that breaks the camel's back in policing the Premier League's spending, it's as good as saying there are no laws worth adhering to. He said just as Lance Armstrong and sprint stars of times past have been stripped of titles, this level of financial doping must be met with the most extreme punishment. Given Everton and Nottingham Forest were docked points for 'minor' infractions, he suggested a 100-point deduction for 114 guilty cases should be the starting point, in addition to massive financial penalties.
