Former Manchester City employees reportedly believe a photograph showing rival executives at a secret meeting in October 2017 is Exhibit A and the smoking gun in their argument that the 'Red Cartel' colluded against the club. The image, taken at a New York restaurant, shows Arsenal chief executive Ivan Gazidis, Liverpool owner John W. Henry, Manchester United owners Avram and Joel Glazer, and executive vice-chairman Ed Woodward seated at the same table.
Chelsea and Tottenham Hotspur were other 'Big Six' clubs not present alongside City. The trio's absence has been explained away as them not being owned by Americans at the time. City's hierarchy, however, are said never to have accepted that justification, and some of the club's supporters are also on board.
Frustration Over Rivals' Involvement
Frustration is mounting among fans at the apparent involvement of the three clubs in their demise. They all wear red, lending the alleged alliance its name. ESPN reports that while City have declined to comment on the alleged 'cartel', sources have indicated that those at the very top of the club harbour no doubt about their rivals' intentions to cause them difficulties.
A source with connections to City was quoted as saying: "From day one, United, Arsenal and Liverpool have been terrified of losing their ability to dominate everything from the Premier League to the transfer market. Chelsea was already a problem for them under Roman Abramovich, but Sheikh Mansour came along [in 2008] and changed everything again, and the red clubs have been in a battle against City ever since."
Historical Criticism of City's Finances
The narrative surrounding the 'Red Cartel' will not be helped by the assertions from Liverpool owner Henry and former Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger. They openly criticised City's financial practices in 2011, six years before the meeting. Wenger called upon UEFA to examine City - as they ultimately unsuccessfully did - and alleged they were manipulating the regulations.
He said: "We must have done a bad deal. It raises the real question about the credibility of financial fair play. That is what this is all about. They give us the message that they can get around it by doing what they want. It means financial fair play will not come in. It is as simple as that."
Wenger added: "I can understand how they do it, but it raises the real question. The difficulty and the credibility of financial fair play are at stake. Plus, if the financial fair play is to have a chance, the sponsorship has to be at the market price. It cannot be doubled, tripled, or quadrupled because that would mean it's better not to do it and leave everybody free. That can be defended as well, but if they bring the rules in, they have to be respected."
Then active on social media, the Liverpool chief said: "A club's best player has to be worth at least 10% of your naming rights. Mr. Wenger says boldly what everyone thinks."
