Manchester City will argue in their Premier League appeal that the extra funding for their sponsorship deals between 2009 and 2018 came from the Abu Dhabi government and not the club’s owners.
An independent commission has found that City broke Premier League financial rules by disguising £830.69m of owner funding as sponsorship income.
City’s lawyers argued during the 2024 hearing that the funding had come from the Abu Dhabi government, but this was rejected by the commission.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Rob Dorsett reports that two senior executives at different top-level Premier League clubs would be ‘amazed’ if 15 clubs would vote to expel Manchester City
In their judgement the commission “concluded that it was an explanation that the club had concocted well after the event in an attempt to conceal the realities of the Disguised Funding Scheme”.
Manchester City is majority owned by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan’s Newton Investment and Development LLC.
Sheikh Mansour is a member of the ruling family of Abu Dhabi and he is the vice president and deputy prime minister of the United Arab Emirates.
Manchester City continue to deny any wrongdoing and plan to appeal before Friday’s deadline.
The potential problems with Man City’s appeal argument
Sky Sports News’ Kaveh Solhekol:
“The problems I can see with this line of argument are two-fold.
“Firstly, they have already argued this, during the original hearing in the autumn of 2024, and it has been dismissed already by the independent commission.
“Secondly, how big of a difference is there between the Abu Dhabi government and the owners of Manchester City? We know there are close links between the two.
“For instance, City are majority owned by Sheikh Mansour’s Newton Investment and Development LLC.
“Sheikh Mansour is also a member of the ruling family of Abu Dhabi and he is the vice president and deputy prime minister of the United Arab Emirates.
“So it is going to be complicated, and it could be a long shot to go into the appeal to argue that the money came from the government and not the owners. But that is going to be one part of the strategy that City are going to be pursuing.”
Why independent commission rejected City’s explanation
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Sky Sports’ chief correspondent Kaveh Solhekol answers more of your questions after Man City’s guilty verdict
The independent commission’s report, released earlier this week, showed how City unsuccessfully argued against the “Disguised Funding Scheme” using this explanation.
City contended that the Abu Dhabi sponsors had always been liable for – and paid – the amounts stated in their financial reports. They denied that it was paid by Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG – the company owned by Shiekh Mansour that owns the City Football Group) or using ADUG funds.
City’s lawyers argued that sometimes the sponsors would apply for financial support from the Abu Dhabi government to help pay for those sponsorship fees.
City contended that the Premier League wrongly identified this financial support from the Abu Dhabi government as money from ADUG.
The report states City claimed that “in each case” the level of government support had been the amount the Premier League “wrongly contended” was from ADUG.
The commission rejected City’s explanation, which it concluded had been “concocted well after the event in an attempt to obscure and conceal the realities of the Disguised Funding Scheme”.
The commission also used an example of the “Disguised Funding Scheme” in action from May 2013.
City, the report says, were faced with potentially falling foul of UEFA’s financial fair play (FFP) rules following an unexpected shortfall on their books less than a week before the end of the financial year.
In a matter of days, the report adds, City generated amended sponsorship agreements that recorded additional Abu Dhabi sponsorship income.
They did this, the report says, without the sponsors ever being approached and, in turn, plugged the shortfall to avoid breaking UEFA’s FFP rules.
Why Man City’s appeal could drag into 2027
Latest from Sky Sports News’ Kaveh Solhekol and Amar Mehta:
Manchester City’s appeal could drag on into next year if they argue that the process should not be run according to Premier League rules which were introduced for this season.
City have until Friday to file their appeal and the new rules about appeals state that this part of the disciplinary process has to be concluded within 12 weeks and the appeal hearing can last no longer than five days.
City’s lawyers could argue that they were charged in 2023 and a hearing was held in 2024 – when the rules about a speeded-up appeals process were not in the Premier League Handbook.
A legal expert told Sky Sports News Manchester City would have a strong case for arguing that the new rules should not apply in this case.
The new rules were introduced to ensure that clubs, where possible, were punished in the same season as relevant rule breaches.
Leave a Reply