Manchester City and Its Charges: A Conflicted Opinion

May 13, 2012. 93 minutes and 20 seconds into the game. A commentary to define a generation, and a goal to define a football club. Martin Tyler exclaims, “Manchester City are still alive. Balotelli. Agueroooo!”

As an Arsenal fan, I was, and still am, conflicted about the 114 charges Manchester City was found guilty of this past week. These charges include failure to provide accurate financial information and accurate details of player/manager payments, failure to comply with Financial Fair Play and other UEFA rules, and breaching the Premier League’s Profit and Sustainability Rules. These offenses span the 2009-10 to 2017-18 seasons and include 35 charges for failure to cooperate with investigations from 2018 to 2024. These charges now put into question every title, award, and winning team that City earned and formed since 2009. Many are now speculating what punishment City will face in light of the charges, and I thought it important to weigh in.

I read two opposing opinions on the matter, one by Zachary Marx and the other by Edward Perovic. Marx argues for harsh punishments, such as relegation or expulsion from the league, and stripping City of its titles. Perovic, on the other hand, believes that, based on precedent in previous charges to clubs like Chelsea, City will likely face a large fine and point deduction, and then everyone should “move on from it — for the good of the game.” I believe that neither of these options gives the full picture of the matter, and, more importantly, neither addresses the issue from the fans’ perspective.

Marx’s argument for relegation or stripping City of titles doesn’t address several problems left in the charges’ wake. 

Firstly, relegating City to League One or any other tier of English Football does practically nothing except prevent City from playing Premier League football for a few seasons, if that. As a consistent top-four side, and oftentimes the league winner, City will have no issue coming back to English Football’s highest division. City’s streak in the Premier League may end, but that’s relatively nothing to a club that’s been in the league for only 24 consecutive years.

Secondly, stripping City of titles doesn’t address concerns about the legitimacy of the previous seasons and the fans’ spirit. Stating that City no longer won those titles doesn’t take away from the fact that the team did. Citizens still celebrated the several league titles, EFL Cups, and FA Championships that City won throughout the alleged offense period. By either voiding the seasons or awarding the title to the runner-up, it doesn’t address the fact that City and its fans benefited from the titles. They gained more legitimacy as a club and have attracted many big-name players to their team, possibly using dubious financial measures alongside their newfound legitimacy. 

You can award other teams with financial compensation and these titles, but fans don’t feel that the title is truly theirs. Sports are about competing at the highest level and seeing who earns the top spot — to be the best. Retroactively declaring new winners doesn’t allow fans to truly embrace that win as their own, and it certainly doesn’t negate all the sadness they already felt because of losing. 

Despite my opposition to these two harsh measures, I don’t believe that a “slap on the wrist” approach is appropriate either.

Perovic, in his argument, fails to see that precedent dictates a harsher punishment. The author compares City to Chelsea in its charges and declares that the punishments should be equivalent. These two situations, however, are fundamentally different.

After new buyers purchased Chelsea from Russian billionaire Roman Abramovich in 2022, these owners self-reported 74 historical financial breaches and worked transparently with the Football Association (FA), “‘voluntarily and proactively disclosing many thousands of documents.’” These new owners likely had no involvement in these historic breaches, but came forward anyway and faced a fairly minor punishment of a £10 million fine and a two-window transfer ban.

In comparison, City did not admit any wrongdoing or to the 114 guilty charges. With 35 of the 114 charges going solely towards City’s failure to cooperate with the investigations, it makes the club’s position much more combative in the public eye and makes it unlikely for any good-faith negotiations or settlement to take place. City maintained its innocence even in light of the overwhelming evidence against it. Unlike Chelsea, City clearly tried to bury its illicit activity by denying the accusations, impeding investigations, and remaining remorseless. The two situations could not be more different, and City should face a far more serious punishment for its clear intent behind its crimes and obstinacy in resolving the issue. 

It is also unrealistic to expect fans to just “move on from it,” as Perovic says. The joy in sports comes from an unwavering support for your team or player. As much as fans will complain and try to make excuses for when their team doesn’t win, they still respect the outcome because it appeared fair — everyone on an equal playing field. Moments in sports that show how unequal or unfair a decision, game, or league is delegitimize the entire operation. With one of the most dominant football dynasties in history, City in the 2010s has delegitimized not only its winning history but the entire Premier League. If the FA doesn’t punish City seriously, merely levying a hefty fine and deducting some less-than-meaningful points, the Premier League will never again be taken seriously as a league in which all teams operate on a level playing field. The FA will reinforce the belief that has crept into football over the past decades that only the richest clubs will win, and that those with money can buy their way out of punishment.

Frustratingly, no punishment now doled out to City will ever remedy the harm they’ve caused since the 2009-10 season. They’ve proven that illegality is profitable. Now, what’s keeping clubs of City’s financial profile from engaging in the same activities? Guardrails? The money is simply too much. The only hope is that clubs will simply follow the rules of their own volition. Smaller club fans will never again feel secure in their trust of fair play, and they will feel robbed by the affluent who dominate the competition. What’s more, no Citizens will feel proud that their entire club history in the 2010s and even the first half of the 2020s will always carry an asterisk.

Henceforth, I will always feel vexed when I hear that iconic “Agueroooo” commentary. I now know that moment, regardless of its legendary status, was not the summation of a legendary Premier League campaign, as I had once thought, but rather the result of an orchestrated financial scheme that not only victimized fellow clubs but also all of us who care about Premier League soccer.