Manchester City have appealed the independent commission's guilty verdict on almost all of the 115 Premier League charges brought against them, a decision that will now be reviewed by a fresh three-person commission. The appeal means the club's punishment remains unresolved, with the case potentially stretching beyond this season and possibly for years.
Appeal process and timeline
The new commission, convened by the Premier League's judicial panel, will only review the decision rather than re-hear the case. Under league rules, the hearing must take place within 12 weeks of the appeal being lodged, be held over no more than five days in one block, and a verdict must be delivered within 30 days of the hearing finishing.
However, the complex nature of the case and the time it has already taken could see that timescale extended. There will also be a separate sanctions hearing to determine City's punishment, and it remains unclear whether that will occur before or after the appeal. City can also appeal the outcome of the sanctions hearing, and some legal experts have speculated the case could easily run past the end of this season and potentially continue for years.
City's position on the verdict
The core verdict found that City created sham sponsorship agreements worth £830 million, leaving the club facing a wide range of potential punishments. Speaking on the Talking City podcast, Manchester Evening News Chief City writer Simon Bajkowski outlined City's stance as they seek to overturn the decision.
Bajkowski said: "There was a mention that the club had a number of criticisms about the process and the way that the Premier League had brought everything against City and you imagine that would be run again." He added: "City mentioned an unsafe verdict and reading between the lines it's that it has taken so long for a verdict and how can you be so sure that witnesses were untrue or whatever if you are thinking back two years to when they were on the stand."
He continued: "City are appealing the guilty verdicts because they think they have cause and they think they have evidence but also they have paid people very handsomely to be in the room for the 11 weeks when it took place. And the reason why it stunned people at City when they were found guilty of so many things is that these people are experienced in knowing how a case was going and the feeling after those 11 weeks was certainly not 'we've lost on every count.' So there is a sense that a different set of eyes might have a different view."
Core evidence and defence
Bajkowski explained the central dispute: "But as much as there is process things, there is the core evidence that the Premier League say that City owners or executives secretly pumped equity into the club and disguised it as sponsorship money. And the club say that the sponsors did have that shortfall and couldn't pay it for themselves but they went to the Abu Dhabi government to get the money, so the money has come from the Abu Dhabi government rather than the club, which is not against the rules."
He added: "And when City say they have irrefutable evidence, it is to show that. Their evidence shows that the money did not come from Man City to the sponsors to then go back into Man City's books. It came from the Abu Dhabi government to the sponsors which then paid Manchester City."
