Downing Street said Manchester City must face consequences after an independent commission found the club guilty of breaching Premier League financial rules in most of the 115 charges it faced. The ruling accused City of arranging “sham contracts” with commercial partners to hide more than £830m in secret funding. The Premier League said the club “systematically broke Premier League Rules for nearly a decade.”
The commission’s findings have set off a political storm after Prime Minister Andy Burnham was criticised for suggesting on 21 June that he would be “really concerned” if the club’s owners decided to sell the club. Burnham, who was mayor of Greater Manchester until June, said City’s owners had been “a huge partner” in building modern Manchester and the club’s global profile.
Burnham also said he was “not getting directly involved in the process,” emphasising that it was “contested by Manchester City” and that the Premier League’s investigation must be “undertaken independently.” However, his comments drew swift condemnation from Tory MPs who accused him of publicly backing the owners amid an ongoing probe.
“The club face unprecedented allegations and fans are horrified by what they are reading in the papers,” said Louie French, shadow minister for sport. “Yet Burnham is publicly backing the owners even as the investigation continues. Fans will rightly ask whether political pressure is being applied here and how it relates to the owners’ well-reported investments in Manchester.” French called on the government to “keep politics out of football” and ensure the Premier League’s commission operates without outside influence.
Lib Dem MP Anna Sabine added: “Fans of every club deserve to know the rules apply to everyone… Burnham needs to remember he’s prime minister for everyone, not just Manchester.”
Downing Street responded with a statement stressing that the prime minister had made clear “the initial judgement is serious, and there can’t be any suggestion that anyone is above the rules.” A No 10 spokesperson said the process was “ongoing” and “independent,” adding: “Wherever wrongdoing is established, those responsible should face the appropriate consequences.”
City deny any wrongdoing and have until Friday to submit an appeal. Sources told BBC Sport that the club plans to argue key sponsorship deals were funded by the Abu Dhabi government rather than the club’s owners. The club’s ownership group has been led since 2008 by Sheikh Mansour, a royal and deputy prime minister of the United Arab Emirates.
The independent panel’s findings will lead to a sanctions hearing that could take months. Possible punishments include a large fine or points deduction. City have maintained their innocence throughout.
The case has attracted attention beyond football. Dame Meg Hillier, chairwoman of the Commons Treasury committee, wrote to HM Revenue & Customs on 22 June seeking assurance it understood the case’s importance for potential tax implications.
David Kogan, chairman of the Independent Football Regulator (IFR), set up by the government in 2025, said the case raised “serious issues.” He confirmed the IFR “has powers to assess the suitability of owners, directors and executives and we will use these powers where appropriate,” while taking into account the Premier League’s findings. Kogan said proceedings remain ongoing and expressed hope for a swift resolution.
Burnham, in his BBC interview, defended his past dealings with City’s owners, saying he was “of course” confident they would withstand scrutiny. He also compared the City case to Everton’s 2023 charge for a minor breach of Premier League financial rules, commenting that Everton “weren’t fairly treated in that process.”
The Premier League said City had “systematically broke” rules “for nearly a decade.” The scale of the commission’s findings and the strength of the Premier League’s statement stunned many in football. The next steps hinge on the sanctions hearing and any appeals.
The controversy has put football’s governance under a spotlight rarely seen so far this year, with questions about political influence and regulatory independence at the centre.
According to Joy Online.
