BREAKING: MANCHESTER CITY GUILTY

Had to laugh at this :

Surely once and for all this settles the debate about who is better out of Ferguson and Guardiola. I get Man Utd spent a lot of money too, but it's now known that Man City seriously broke many rules.

Personally I always said Ferguson was better anyway, partly because of what he did in Scotland.

I am on the opposite side of the debate from most of you. Yes, they broke the rules; these rules were designed to keep all the privileges of the old clubs against new money.

I am a free marketer; FFP is a mechanism for the established clubs to keep doing what they do, whilst stealing from others. They bought the league in the same way as Liverpool, Chelsea and United did in previous eras. I have attached the Gemini search o did this morning on spending from 2009 to 2022.

The only agencies i want involved won't be, because the British Government (whoever) will not investigate Middle East allies and customers. But in any other circumstance, what they did, if true, is serious fraud, so the fraud office and HMRC should be all over external payments in Middle East accounts and bitcoin for services or jobs whilst in the UK.

I'd rather the Man City model of investing in the club, surrounding area and society without loading the debt onto the club as their near neighbours and countless others do....

I think they will get a 50 point deduction, enough to look serious without really hurting them.


Gemini search 26th Septemeber

Since 2009 to 2022, which Premier League club has spent the most on transfers

Manchester City spent the most on transfer fees between the summer of 2009 and the close of the 2022 summer transfer window, recording a total gross transfer expenditure of roughly €2.01 billion (~£1.7 billion).

Following closely behind in gross expenditure is Chelsea, whose summer 2022 spending push under new ownership brought their total spend for the same period to approximately €2.00 billion (~£1.68 billion).

When evaluated by net spend (total transfer expenditure minus income generated from player sales) between 2009 and 2022, the order shifts:

Manchester United registered the highest net spend in the Premier League at approximately €1.27 billion (~£1.08 billion), driven by high purchase costs relative to lower player sales revenue.

Manchester City held the second-highest net spend at approximately €1.03 billion (~£880 million), supported by stronger player sales (such as Raheem Sterling, Gabriel Jesus, and Leroy Sané) in the latter half of that timeframe.

Chelsea held a significantly lower net spend (~€650 million / ~£550 million) despite high gross outlay, owing to substantial player sales and academy departures (such as Eden Hazard, Oscar, and Diego Costa).

I am on the opposite side of the debate from most of you. Yes, they broke the rules; these rules were designed to keep all the privileges of the old clubs against new money.

I am a free marketer; FFP is a mechanism for the established clubs to keep doing what they do, whilst stealing from others. They bought the league in the same way as Liverpool, Chelsea and United did in previous eras. I have attached the Gemini search o did this morning on spending from 2009 to 2022.

The only agencies i want involved won't be, because the British Government (whoever) will not investigate Middle East allies and customers. But in any other circumstance, what they did, if true, is serious fraud, so the fraud office and HMRC should be all over external payments in Middle East accounts and bitcoin for services or jobs whilst in the UK.

I'd rather the Man City model of investing in the club, surrounding area and society without loading the debt onto the club as their near neighbours and countless others do....

I think they will get a 50 point deduction, enough to look serious without really hurting them.


Gemini search 26th Septemeber

Since 2009 to 2022, which Premier League club has spent the most on transfers

Manchester City spent the most on transfer fees between the summer of 2009 and the close of the 2022 summer transfer window, recording a total gross transfer expenditure of roughly €2.01 billion (~£1.7 billion).

Following closely behind in gross expenditure is Chelsea, whose summer 2022 spending push under new ownership brought their total spend for the same period to approximately €2.00 billion (~£1.68 billion).

When evaluated by net spend (total transfer expenditure minus income generated from player sales) between 2009 and 2022, the order shifts:

Manchester United registered the highest net spend in the Premier League at approximately €1.27 billion (~£1.08 billion), driven by high purchase costs relative to lower player sales revenue.

Manchester City held the second-highest net spend at approximately €1.03 billion (~£880 million), supported by stronger player sales (such as Raheem Sterling, Gabriel Jesus, and Leroy Sané) in the latter half of that timeframe.

Chelsea held a significantly lower net spend (~€650 million / ~£550 million) despite high gross outlay, owing to substantial player sales and academy departures (such as Eden Hazard, Oscar, and Diego Costa).

Sorry but I don't see how we can say it's right for Everton and Forest to get points deductions but because Man City's owners invest in the local area then let's water down their punishment.

They have broke the rules and not only that, they didn't co-operate with the Premier League - if they had the punishment would be less. Chelsea received just a big fine recently but that's mainly because they self reported themselves.

We can talk about net spends all we want but that's not the point. The point is they had more money by breaking the rules 114 times.

They have used that to fast track their way to the top. Newcastle, Villa etc would love to do that but they can't because of the rules. That is why the punishment will be severe.

I think your prediction of a 50 point deduction is unlikely, just basing that on what Stefan Borson has said on TV this morning (he's a football finance expert and has worked for Man City:

"An appeal is extremely unlikely to succeed.

They are very likely looking at relegation. Whether that's through expulsion or a points deduction of 80-100 points".


The Premier League have been under huge pressure from Man City's very expensive lawyers to drop this or water it down. They haven't given in.

They would not take it this far if they weren't going to go in heavy on them.

I am on the opposite side of the debate from most of you. Yes, they broke the rules; these rules were designed to keep all the privileges of the old clubs against new money.

I am a free marketer; FFP is a mechanism for the established clubs to keep doing what they do, whilst stealing from others. They bought the league in the same way as Liverpool, Chelsea and United did in previous eras. I have attached the Gemini search o did this morning on spending from 2009 to 2022.

The only agencies i want involved won't be, because the British Government (whoever) will not investigate Middle East allies and customers. But in any other circumstance, what they did, if true, is serious fraud, so the fraud office and HMRC should be all over external payments in Middle East accounts and bitcoin for services or jobs whilst in the UK.

I'd rather the Man City model of investing in the club, surrounding area and society without loading the debt onto the club as their near neighbours and countless others do....

I think they will get a 50 point deduction, enough to look serious without really hurting them.


Gemini search 26th Septemeber

Since 2009 to 2022, which Premier League club has spent the most on transfers

Manchester City spent the most on transfer fees between the summer of 2009 and the close of the 2022 summer transfer window, recording a total gross transfer expenditure of roughly €2.01 billion (~£1.7 billion).

Following closely behind in gross expenditure is Chelsea, whose summer 2022 spending push under new ownership brought their total spend for the same period to approximately €2.00 billion (~£1.68 billion).

When evaluated by net spend (total transfer expenditure minus income generated from player sales) between 2009 and 2022, the order shifts:

Manchester United registered the highest net spend in the Premier League at approximately €1.27 billion (~£1.08 billion), driven by high purchase costs relative to lower player sales revenue.

Manchester City held the second-highest net spend at approximately €1.03 billion (~£880 million), supported by stronger player sales (such as Raheem Sterling, Gabriel Jesus, and Leroy Sané) in the latter half of that timeframe.

Chelsea held a significantly lower net spend (~€650 million / ~£550 million) despite high gross outlay, owing to substantial player sales and academy departures (such as Eden Hazard, Oscar, and Diego Costa).

Sorry but I don't see how we can say it's right for Everton and Forest to get points deductions but because Man City's owners invest in the local area then let's water down their punishment.

They have broke the rules and not only that, they didn't co-operate with the Premier League - if they had the punishment would be less. Chelsea received just a big fine recently but that's mainly because they self reported themselves.

We can talk about net spends all we want but that's not the point. The point is they had more money by breaking the rules 114 times.

They have used that to fast track their way to the top. Newcastle, Villa etc would love to do that but they can't because of the rules. That is why the punishment will be severe.

I think your prediction of a 50 point deduction is unlikely, just basing that on what Stefan Borson has said on TV this morning (he's a football finance expert and has worked for Man City:

"An appeal is extremely unlikely to succeed.

They are very likely looking at relegation. Whether that's through expulsion or a points deduction of 80-100 points".


The Premier League have been under huge pressure from Man City's very expensive lawyers to drop this or water it down. They haven't given in.

They would not take it this far if they weren't going to go in heavy on them.

They broke the rules of an association that's chicken feed. They broke the law of the land; that's who should go after them, then see what the association deems worthy.

Don't forget this is only football to fans. It's a money business to those involved. Man City, PSG, and other Middle East owners' billions have inflated the European football business out of all context over the last 20 years. Losing Citeh and that close cabal could have disastrous results for revenue and turnover for many Premier League clubs that will be voting on sanctions.

I wait to be shocked by fairness.

I am on the opposite side of the debate from most of you. Yes, they broke the rules; these rules were designed to keep all the privileges of the old clubs against new money.

I am a free marketer; FFP is a mechanism for the established clubs to keep doing what they do, whilst stealing from others. They bought the league in the same way as Liverpool, Chelsea and United did in previous eras. I have attached the Gemini search o did this morning on spending from 2009 to 2022.

The only agencies i want involved won't be, because the British Government (whoever) will not investigate Middle East allies and customers. But in any other circumstance, what they did, if true, is serious fraud, so the fraud office and HMRC should be all over external payments in Middle East accounts and bitcoin for services or jobs whilst in the UK.

I'd rather the Man City model of investing in the club, surrounding area and society without loading the debt onto the club as their near neighbours and countless others do....

I think they will get a 50 point deduction, enough to look serious without really hurting them.


Gemini search 26th Septemeber

Since 2009 to 2022, which Premier League club has spent the most on transfers

Manchester City spent the most on transfer fees between the summer of 2009 and the close of the 2022 summer transfer window, recording a total gross transfer expenditure of roughly €2.01 billion (~£1.7 billion).

Following closely behind in gross expenditure is Chelsea, whose summer 2022 spending push under new ownership brought their total spend for the same period to approximately €2.00 billion (~£1.68 billion).

When evaluated by net spend (total transfer expenditure minus income generated from player sales) between 2009 and 2022, the order shifts:

Manchester United registered the highest net spend in the Premier League at approximately €1.27 billion (~£1.08 billion), driven by high purchase costs relative to lower player sales revenue.

Manchester City held the second-highest net spend at approximately €1.03 billion (~£880 million), supported by stronger player sales (such as Raheem Sterling, Gabriel Jesus, and Leroy Sané) in the latter half of that timeframe.

Chelsea held a significantly lower net spend (~€650 million / ~£550 million) despite high gross outlay, owing to substantial player sales and academy departures (such as Eden Hazard, Oscar, and Diego Costa).

Sorry but I don't see how we can say it's right for Everton and Forest to get points deductions but because Man City's owners invest in the local area then let's water down their punishment.

They have broke the rules and not only that, they didn't co-operate with the Premier League - if they had the punishment would be less. Chelsea received just a big fine recently but that's mainly because they self reported themselves.

We can talk about net spends all we want but that's not the point. The point is they had more money by breaking the rules 114 times.

They have used that to fast track their way to the top. Newcastle, Villa etc would love to do that but they can't because of the rules. That is why the punishment will be severe.

I think your prediction of a 50 point deduction is unlikely, just basing that on what Stefan Borson has said on TV this morning (he's a football finance expert and has worked for Man City:

"An appeal is extremely unlikely to succeed.

They are very likely looking at relegation. Whether that's through expulsion or a points deduction of 80-100 points".


The Premier League have been under huge pressure from Man City's very expensive lawyers to drop this or water it down. They haven't given in.

They would not take it this far if they weren't going to go in heavy on them.

They broke the rules of an association that's chicken feed. They broke the law of the land; that's who should go after them, then see what the association deems worthy.

Don't forget this is only football to fans. It's a money business to those involved. Man City, PSG, and other Middle East owners' billions have inflated the European football business out of all context over the last 20 years. Losing Citeh and that close cabal could have disastrous results for revenue and turnover for many Premier League clubs that will be voting on sanctions.

I wait to be shocked by fairness.

Not buying that, otherwise the Premier League would have just brushed this under the carpet and not pushed it as much as they have.

I'm taking my lead on this from football finance experts because they know a lot more than I do, they all suggest relegation will be likely.

If they don't go heavy on them then what's to stop Newcastle deciding they won't follow the rules so they can fast track their way to the top?

Or what about Forest and Everton? They got points deductions so if the punishment to Man City isn't as proportionate then they'll probably take legal action against the Premier League.

Everton were deducted ten points (reduced to six on appeal) for ONE violation of PSR. They also co-operated, unlike Man City.

Seven of the charges against Man City are for PSR violations, so that's 70 points straight away (maybe down to 42 on appeal). Then you've got 35 instances of them not co-operating plus:


- 54x Failure to provide accurate financial information 2009-10 to 2017-18.

- 14x Failure to provide accurate details for player and manager payments from 2009-10 to 2017-18.

- 5x Failure to comply with Uefa's rules including Financial Fair Play (FFP) 2013-14 to 2017-18.

Well the party as begun! Clubs are now looking at the possibility of sueing man c for whatever they think they can get? Said yesterday this coulds get messy for reason mentioned...... does the Premier league want lots clubs involved in litigation against a fellow member that could go on for years plus their own battle with man c appeals?v like said they could technically appeal every charge one at a time and that is a cost Premier League cannot sustain! The can of worms as been opened lets see how many crawl out of it.

Well the party as begun! Clubs are now looking at the possibility of sueing man c for whatever they think they can get? Said yesterday this coulds get messy for reason mentioned...... does the Premier league want lots clubs involved in litigation against a fellow member that could go on for years plus their own battle with man c appeals?v like said they could technically appeal every charge one at a time and that is a cost Premier League cannot sustain! The can of worms as been opened lets see how many crawl out of it.

Stefan Borson said the appeal process won't go through every single bit of evidence again - he said there's over half a million pieces of evidence between both sides.

He thinks the basis of Man City's appeal will be that the independent panel weren't independent, so the appeal process will be much quicker. He also thinks it's extremely unlikely to succeed.

The Premier League have taken things this far, they won't stop now. As for clubs taking legal action, it's been suggested that the Premier League lawyers will take on the complaints from all clubs and do it in one legal action so there aren't loads and loads of different cases.

I am on the opposite side of the debate from most of you. Yes, they broke the rules; these rules were designed to keep all the privileges of the old clubs against new money.

I am a free marketer; FFP is a mechanism for the established clubs to keep doing what they do, whilst stealing from others. They bought the league in the same way as Liverpool, Chelsea and United did in previous eras. I have attached the Gemini search o did this morning on spending from 2009 to 2022.

The only agencies i want involved won't be, because the British Government (whoever) will not investigate Middle East allies and customers. But in any other circumstance, what they did, if true, is serious fraud, so the fraud office and HMRC should be all over external payments in Middle East accounts and bitcoin for services or jobs whilst in the UK.

I'd rather the Man City model of investing in the club, surrounding area and society without loading the debt onto the club as their near neighbours and countless others do....

I think they will get a 50 point deduction, enough to look serious without really hurting them.


Gemini search 26th Septemeber

Since 2009 to 2022, which Premier League club has spent the most on transfers

Manchester City spent the most on transfer fees between the summer of 2009 and the close of the 2022 summer transfer window, recording a total gross transfer expenditure of roughly €2.01 billion (~£1.7 billion).

Following closely behind in gross expenditure is Chelsea, whose summer 2022 spending push under new ownership brought their total spend for the same period to approximately €2.00 billion (~£1.68 billion).

When evaluated by net spend (total transfer expenditure minus income generated from player sales) between 2009 and 2022, the order shifts:

Manchester United registered the highest net spend in the Premier League at approximately €1.27 billion (~£1.08 billion), driven by high purchase costs relative to lower player sales revenue.

Manchester City held the second-highest net spend at approximately €1.03 billion (~£880 million), supported by stronger player sales (such as Raheem Sterling, Gabriel Jesus, and Leroy Sané) in the latter half of that timeframe.

Chelsea held a significantly lower net spend (~€650 million / ~£550 million) despite high gross outlay, owing to substantial player sales and academy departures (such as Eden Hazard, Oscar, and Diego Costa).

Sorry but I don't see how we can say it's right for Everton and Forest to get points deductions but because Man City's owners invest in the local area then let's water down their punishment.

They have broke the rules and not only that, they didn't co-operate with the Premier League - if they had the punishment would be less. Chelsea received just a big fine recently but that's mainly because they self reported themselves.

We can talk about net spends all we want but that's not the point. The point is they had more money by breaking the rules 114 times.

They have used that to fast track their way to the top. Newcastle, Villa etc would love to do that but they can't because of the rules. That is why the punishment will be severe.

I think your prediction of a 50 point deduction is unlikely, just basing that on what Stefan Borson has said on TV this morning (he's a football finance expert and has worked for Man City:

"An appeal is extremely unlikely to succeed.

They are very likely looking at relegation. Whether that's through expulsion or a points deduction of 80-100 points".


The Premier League have been under huge pressure from Man City's very expensive lawyers to drop this or water it down. They haven't given in.

They would not take it this far if they weren't going to go in heavy on them.

Agree; and Citeh signed up to all FFP, PL, FA, and UEFA charters when they entered their leagues, cups, and competitions. They were caught out (big time) and deserve sanctions

I would say the same for any club, and I hope expulsion from the Premier League in the form of relegation is a serious option

I am on the opposite side of the debate from most of you. Yes, they broke the rules; these rules were designed to keep all the privileges of the old clubs against new money.

I am a free marketer; FFP is a mechanism for the established clubs to keep doing what they do, whilst stealing from others. They bought the league in the same way as Liverpool, Chelsea and United did in previous eras. I have attached the Gemini search o did this morning on spending from 2009 to 2022.

The only agencies i want involved won't be, because the British Government (whoever) will not investigate Middle East allies and customers. But in any other circumstance, what they did, if true, is serious fraud, so the fraud office and HMRC should be all over external payments in Middle East accounts and bitcoin for services or jobs whilst in the UK.

I'd rather the Man City model of investing in the club, surrounding area and society without loading the debt onto the club as their near neighbours and countless others do....

I think they will get a 50 point deduction, enough to look serious without really hurting them.


Gemini search 26th Septemeber

Since 2009 to 2022, which Premier League club has spent the most on transfers

Manchester City spent the most on transfer fees between the summer of 2009 and the close of the 2022 summer transfer window, recording a total gross transfer expenditure of roughly €2.01 billion (~£1.7 billion).

Following closely behind in gross expenditure is Chelsea, whose summer 2022 spending push under new ownership brought their total spend for the same period to approximately €2.00 billion (~£1.68 billion).

When evaluated by net spend (total transfer expenditure minus income generated from player sales) between 2009 and 2022, the order shifts:

Manchester United registered the highest net spend in the Premier League at approximately €1.27 billion (~£1.08 billion), driven by high purchase costs relative to lower player sales revenue.

Manchester City held the second-highest net spend at approximately €1.03 billion (~£880 million), supported by stronger player sales (such as Raheem Sterling, Gabriel Jesus, and Leroy Sané) in the latter half of that timeframe.

Chelsea held a significantly lower net spend (~€650 million / ~£550 million) despite high gross outlay, owing to substantial player sales and academy departures (such as Eden Hazard, Oscar, and Diego Costa).

Sorry but I don't see how we can say it's right for Everton and Forest to get points deductions but because Man City's owners invest in the local area then let's water down their punishment.

They have broke the rules and not only that, they didn't co-operate with the Premier League - if they had the punishment would be less. Chelsea received just a big fine recently but that's mainly because they self reported themselves.

We can talk about net spends all we want but that's not the point. The point is they had more money by breaking the rules 114 times.

They have used that to fast track their way to the top. Newcastle, Villa etc would love to do that but they can't because of the rules. That is why the punishment will be severe.

I think your prediction of a 50 point deduction is unlikely, just basing that on what Stefan Borson has said on TV this morning (he's a football finance expert and has worked for Man City:

"An appeal is extremely unlikely to succeed.

They are very likely looking at relegation. Whether that's through expulsion or a points deduction of 80-100 points".


The Premier League have been under huge pressure from Man City's very expensive lawyers to drop this or water it down. They haven't given in.

They would not take it this far if they weren't going to go in heavy on them.

They broke the rules of an association that's chicken feed. They broke the law of the land; that's who should go after them, then see what the association deems worthy.

Don't forget this is only football to fans. It's a money business to those involved. Man City, PSG, and other Middle East owners' billions have inflated the European football business out of all context over the last 20 years. Losing Citeh and that close cabal could have disastrous results for revenue and turnover for many Premier League clubs that will be voting on sanctions.

I wait to be shocked by fairness.

That’s a very skewed view. ‘Chicken feed’ demeans the situation, where that club schemed, lied, misled, failed to comply, failed to disclose, and had an arrogant ‘you can’t touch us ‘cos we’ve covered our tracks’ attitude throughout

As the Boomtown Rats sang, ‘it’s a rat trap, Citeh; and you’ve been caught!’

Europe won’t miss Man Citeh, so long as the rest of the Euro franchise stays intact

As someone else said, Citeh are ‘new money’ and weren’t overly welcomed to the top table until Pep got involved to give them limited credibility

Well the party as begun! Clubs are now looking at the possibility of sueing man c for whatever they think they can get? Said yesterday this coulds get messy for reason mentioned...... does the Premier league want lots clubs involved in litigation against a fellow member that could go on for years plus their own battle with man c appeals?v like said they could technically appeal every charge one at a time and that is a cost Premier League cannot sustain! The can of worms as been opened lets see how many crawl out of it.

Stefan Borson said the appeal process won't go through every single bit of evidence again - he said there's over half a million pieces of evidence between both sides.

He thinks the basis of Man City's appeal will be that the independent panel weren't independent, so the appeal process will be much quicker. He also thinks it's extremely unlikely to succeed.

The Premier League have taken things this far, they won't stop now. As for clubs taking legal action, it's been suggested that the Premier League lawyers will take on the complaints from all clubs and do it in one legal action so there aren't loads and loads of different cases.

Premier League may take collective action for clubs but will man c just roll over and say ok we will pay compo or will they question every clubs right to compo individually after all each club as different reasons for claiming compo and it goes back long way could city claim As they got relegated by 1 point did this effect them? would you just accept you owe me 60m without questioning how arrived at that ammount? You make basic points what Premier League will do but will Manchester owners play ball that's what I'm questioning? After all they're still proclaiming innocence and got deeper pockets than premier league.. but guess we will know once its all finished.

Well the party as begun! Clubs are now looking at the possibility of sueing man c for whatever they think they can get? Said yesterday this coulds get messy for reason mentioned...... does the Premier league want lots clubs involved in litigation against a fellow member that could go on for years plus their own battle with man c appeals?v like said they could technically appeal every charge one at a time and that is a cost Premier League cannot sustain! The can of worms as been opened lets see how many crawl out of it.

Stefan Borson said the appeal process won't go through every single bit of evidence again - he said there's over half a million pieces of evidence between both sides.

He thinks the basis of Man City's appeal will be that the independent panel weren't independent, so the appeal process will be much quicker. He also thinks it's extremely unlikely to succeed.

The Premier League have taken things this far, they won't stop now. As for clubs taking legal action, it's been suggested that the Premier League lawyers will take on the complaints from all clubs and do it in one legal action so there aren't loads and loads of different cases.

Premier League may take collective action for clubs but will man c just roll over and say ok we will pay compo or will they question every clubs right to compo individually after all each club as different reasons for claiming compo and it goes back long way could city claim As they got relegated by 1 point did this effect them? would you just accept you owe me 60m without questioning how arrived at that ammount? You make basic points what Premier League will do but will Manchester owners play ball that's what I'm questioning? After all they're still proclaiming innocence and got deeper pockets than premier league.. but guess we will know once its all finished.

To be fair Allan, I'm only basing it on what these football finance experts are saying because I don't fully understand it myself so taking my lead on this from them.

I am on the opposite side of the debate from most of you. Yes, they broke the rules; these rules were designed to keep all the privileges of the old clubs against new money.

I am a free marketer; FFP is a mechanism for the established clubs to keep doing what they do, whilst stealing from others. They bought the league in the same way as Liverpool, Chelsea and United did in previous eras. I have attached the Gemini search o did this morning on spending from 2009 to 2022.

The only agencies i want involved won't be, because the British Government (whoever) will not investigate Middle East allies and customers. But in any other circumstance, what they did, if true, is serious fraud, so the fraud office and HMRC should be all over external payments in Middle East accounts and bitcoin for services or jobs whilst in the UK.

I'd rather the Man City model of investing in the club, surrounding area and society without loading the debt onto the club as their near neighbours and countless others do....

I think they will get a 50 point deduction, enough to look serious without really hurting them.


Gemini search 26th Septemeber

Since 2009 to 2022, which Premier League club has spent the most on transfers

Manchester City spent the most on transfer fees between the summer of 2009 and the close of the 2022 summer transfer window, recording a total gross transfer expenditure of roughly €2.01 billion (~£1.7 billion).

Following closely behind in gross expenditure is Chelsea, whose summer 2022 spending push under new ownership brought their total spend for the same period to approximately €2.00 billion (~£1.68 billion).

When evaluated by net spend (total transfer expenditure minus income generated from player sales) between 2009 and 2022, the order shifts:

Manchester United registered the highest net spend in the Premier League at approximately €1.27 billion (~£1.08 billion), driven by high purchase costs relative to lower player sales revenue.

Manchester City held the second-highest net spend at approximately €1.03 billion (~£880 million), supported by stronger player sales (such as Raheem Sterling, Gabriel Jesus, and Leroy Sané) in the latter half of that timeframe.

Chelsea held a significantly lower net spend (~€650 million / ~£550 million) despite high gross outlay, owing to substantial player sales and academy departures (such as Eden Hazard, Oscar, and Diego Costa).

Sorry but I don't see how we can say it's right for Everton and Forest to get points deductions but because Man City's owners invest in the local area then let's water down their punishment.

They have broke the rules and not only that, they didn't co-operate with the Premier League - if they had the punishment would be less. Chelsea received just a big fine recently but that's mainly because they self reported themselves.

We can talk about net spends all we want but that's not the point. The point is they had more money by breaking the rules 114 times.

They have used that to fast track their way to the top. Newcastle, Villa etc would love to do that but they can't because of the rules. That is why the punishment will be severe.

I think your prediction of a 50 point deduction is unlikely, just basing that on what Stefan Borson has said on TV this morning (he's a football finance expert and has worked for Man City:

"An appeal is extremely unlikely to succeed.

They are very likely looking at relegation. Whether that's through expulsion or a points deduction of 80-100 points".


The Premier League have been under huge pressure from Man City's very expensive lawyers to drop this or water it down. They haven't given in.

They would not take it this far if they weren't going to go in heavy on them.

They broke the rules of an association that's chicken feed. They broke the law of the land; that's who should go after them, then see what the association deems worthy.

Don't forget this is only football to fans. It's a money business to those involved. Man City, PSG, and other Middle East owners' billions have inflated the European football business out of all context over the last 20 years. Losing Citeh and that close cabal could have disastrous results for revenue and turnover for many Premier League clubs that will be voting on sanctions.

I wait to be shocked by fairness.

That’s a very skewed view. ‘Chicken feed’ demeans the situation, where that club schemed, lied, misled, failed to comply, failed to disclose, and had an arrogant ‘you can’t touch us ‘cos we’ve covered our tracks’ attitude throughout

As the Boomtown Rats sang, ‘it’s a rat trap, Citeh; and you’ve been caught!’

Europe won’t miss Man Citeh, so long as the rest of the Euro franchise stays intact

As someone else said, Citeh are ‘new money’ and weren’t overly welcomed to the top table until Pep got involved to give them limited credibility

Correct Chris.

Remember the rules were first tightened after Abramovich had made Chelsea a regular at the top of the table and in Europe.

That was because the likes of Man Utd, Liverpool and Arsenal didn't like the idea of someone else joining their exclusive club.

I don't like that but neither do I like Man City breaking those rules 114 times. They will get a hefty punishment and rightly so, they deserve that. As well as that, it will show a deterrent to other clubs. Otherwise someone like Newcastle would think it doesn't matter how many rules they break (they have the money if they wanted to). Like I said before, likes of Everton and Forest would take legal action as well.

So the Premier League have no choice, they have to impose heavy sanctions.

Well the party as begun! Clubs are now looking at the possibility of sueing man c for whatever they think they can get? Said yesterday this coulds get messy for reason mentioned...... does the Premier league want lots clubs involved in litigation against a fellow member that could go on for years plus their own battle with man c appeals?v like said they could technically appeal every charge one at a time and that is a cost Premier League cannot sustain! The can of worms as been opened lets see how many crawl out of it.

Stefan Borson said the appeal process won't go through every single bit of evidence again - he said there's over half a million pieces of evidence between both sides.

He thinks the basis of Man City's appeal will be that the independent panel weren't independent, so the appeal process will be much quicker. He also thinks it's extremely unlikely to succeed.

The Premier League have taken things this far, they won't stop now. As for clubs taking legal action, it's been suggested that the Premier League lawyers will take on the complaints from all clubs and do it in one legal action so there aren't loads and loads of different cases.

Premier League may take collective action for clubs but will man c just roll over and say ok we will pay compo or will they question every clubs right to compo individually after all each club as different reasons for claiming compo and it goes back long way could city claim As they got relegated by 1 point did this effect them? would you just accept you owe me 60m without questioning how arrived at that ammount? You make basic points what Premier League will do but will Manchester owners play ball that's what I'm questioning? After all they're still proclaiming innocence and got deeper pockets than premier league.. but guess we will know once its all finished.

To be fair Allan, I'm only basing it on what these football finance experts are saying because I don't fully understand it myself so taking my lead on this from them.

I know thats why I say will man c play ball considering they are still proclaiming innocence? I did say yesterday think what happens depends entirely on man c simply because they have the right to question separately the 5 different charges with an appeal as obviously they all carry different punishments ... as for the compo to clubs cannot see them accepting ammounts without questioning each clubs right to compo and the ammount..... Premier League can say what they want but what happens does depend on man c owners.... as for punishment no ammount of points deduction will be of use unless its in access of 50! Massive fine and relegation is only viable options! One thing thought of could man c owners drag villa and Chelsea into the argument seeing as they've deliberately manipulated ffp rules (buying selling ladies set up pay inflated transfers for players between each other... just a thought

BTW, Wouldn't be surprised if Tan gets his beloved legal team on this.. City finished in 18th on 34 points, 3 points from safety and we lost 6 points to Citeh that season.

BTW, Wouldn't be surprised if Tan gets his beloved legal team on this.. City finished in 18th on 34 points, 3 points from safety and we lost 6 points to Citeh that season.

You can laugh but this is the problem that can happen according to people! Clubs who missed out on European qualifications can question was it effected by whats happened same as city could regarding relegation and why shouldn't they if others are?..plus each position is worth around 3m and theres 9yrs worth of these results... People ate thinking guilty then appeal lose its all over but that simply is not the case and
Today man c chairman as re-iterated clubs innocence and judging by his statement they're not going to take this lying down!

I read something that made me laugh at first but makes some sort of sense.

If Everton were deducted 6 points for 1 breach then in the interests of fairness the Man City should be deducted 6 points for each breach making a total of over 600 points, stretch that over the 9 years they were found guilty of then that's just over 60 points a season for 9 seasons, seems fair.

I read something that made me laugh at first but makes some sort of sense.

If Everton were deducted 6 points for 1 breach then in the interests of fairness the Man City should be deducted 6 points for each breach making a total of over 600 points, stretch that over the 9 years they were found guilty of then that's just over 60 points a season for 9 seasons, seems fair.

Man c appeal every charge plus any compo awarded it will take about 30yrs to resolve?
There's all sorts of permutations!

Ben Jacobs the journalist is saying the Premier League will push for a record breaking points deduction that will mean relegation.

Also saying that the EFL are prepared to back the Premier League if necessary and also refuse Man City entry into the EFL.

The sanction hearing with the independent panel is still to come where both the Premier League and Man City will present what they believe to be the necessary punishment, although the belief is the panel are likely to side more with the Premier League as Manchester City's credibility has gone after losing on 114 charges.

Ben Jacobs the journalist is saying the Premier League will push for a record breaking points deduction that will mean relegation.

Also saying that the EFL are prepared to back the Premier League if necessary and also refuse Man City entry into the EFL.

The sanction hearing with the independent panel is still to come where both the Premier League and Man City will present what they believe to be the necessary punishment, although the belief is the panel are likely to side more with the Premier League as Manchester City's credibility has gone after losing on 114 charges.

So efl won't allow man c into efl mmmmm if premier league dock enough points that city are relegated what grounds can efl have for not allowing them into championship? After all they've not broken any efl rules? It is getting silly these so called experts with their speculations
Ps ned its over £50m premier league as spent on this case. I just heared...

Ben Jacobs the journalist is saying the Premier League will push for a record breaking points deduction that will mean relegation.

Also saying that the EFL are prepared to back the Premier League if necessary and also refuse Man City entry into the EFL.

The sanction hearing with the independent panel is still to come where both the Premier League and Man City will present what they believe to be the necessary punishment, although the belief is the panel are likely to side more with the Premier League as Manchester City's credibility has gone after losing on 114 charges.

So efl won't allow man c into efl mmmmm if premier league dock enough points that city are relegated what grounds can efl have for not allowing them into championship? After all they've not broken any efl rules? It is getting silly these so called experts with their speculations
Ps ned its over £50m premier league as spent on this case. I just heared...

Get what you're saying but to be fair, the EFL have the right to not allow entry to any team they want. They could make an argument that Man City brought the game into disrepute and they don't want them in their leagues.

Personally I get the feeling they will be relegated but I'd be surprised if they weren't allowed in the Championship.

Ben Jacobs the journalist is saying the Premier League will push for a record breaking points deduction that will mean relegation.

Also saying that the EFL are prepared to back the Premier League if necessary and also refuse Man City entry into the EFL.

The sanction hearing with the independent panel is still to come where both the Premier League and Man City will present what they believe to be the necessary punishment, although the belief is the panel are likely to side more with the Premier League as Manchester City's credibility has gone after losing on 114 charges.

So efl won't allow man c into efl mmmmm if premier league dock enough points that city are relegated what grounds can efl have for not allowing them into championship? After all they've not broken any efl rules? It is getting silly these so called experts with their speculations
Ps ned its over £50m premier league as spent on this case. I just heared...

Get what you're saying but to be fair, the EFL have the right to not allow entry to any team they want. They could make an argument that Man City brought the game into disrepute and they don't want them in their leagues.

Personally I get the feeling they will be relegated but I'd be surprised if they weren't allowed in the Championship.

Agree just cant see them not allowing them in (thought there had to be a vote anyway) let's hope they come to an agreement on punishment believe there's meeting around this! Think premier league whilst want to throw book at them got to be careful they don't go so as to make them challenge every charge which they're entitled to do? As just said £50m+ and counting ....it was said long time ago this could be so expensive that premier league would have to drop charges as cant sustain the costs .... a fine balancing act for both parties they need to be punished but not enough to make them fight back .... their chairman today indicated didn't t accept the guilty verdicts given

On 28 May 1990 Swindon Town beat Sunderland in the play-off final The joy was short-lived, though,
ten days later, the Football League decided to demote the team two divisions, after they admitted 36 breaches of League rules—35 of which are related to illegal payments. The Swindon board immediately appealed, but High Court action was dropped due to lack of funding, and the fans protested, thousands signing a "1st not 3rd" petition. The FA Appeal Panel reduced the demotion to just one division, and Swindon were denied their first ever taste of top-flight football.

I am weirdly on Citeh's side, since it's the lesser of two evils for me and we are powerless in either

Euro football is caught in a financial battle between two different types of wealthy owners:
American investment funds
super-rich state or billionaire owners.

American funds and traditional big clubs now want strict rules that limit team spending to a percentage of the club's revenue. This system protects the owner's profits, keeps the established top clubs at the top, and allows owners to use bank debt to run the club without having to compete against endless cash injections.

In the other corner are the state and billionaire owners pump their own cash directly into the club to buy players and upgrade facilities. They do not burden the club with debt, but their massive spending drives up player wages and transfer prices across the entire sport.

The battle comes down to how football is run. Private equity owners want to protect their financial returns by limiting spending and using debt, while state owners use vast reserves of cash to outspend everyone else, creating a financial race that standard clubs cannot match.

We have lost the local owners so in that case I am for once with Abramovich's Chelsea, and City group as they were investing for purposes other than their immediate balance sheet. Was it not Chelsea and city who said no to the Super League?

The Premier League has ruined football, and the top 6 have ruined the Premier League. I'd love them all to go bust

The premier league is the clubs, so here is a breakdown (11/20). I am just waiting for them to vote for no relegation or other restrictive, risk-reducing things........Be careful what you wish for.



Arsenal — Owned by Kroenke Sports & Entertainment (Stan Kroenke), who also owns the NFL's Los Angeles Rams and NBA's Denver Nuggets.

Aston Villa — Co-owned by V Sports, a joint venture between Egyptian billionaire Nassef Sawiris and American investor Wes Edens (co-owner of the NBA's Milwaukee Bucks).

AFC Bournemouth — Owned by Black Knight Football Club, led by American businessman Bill Foley (owner of the NHL's Vegas Golden Knights).

Chelsea — Controlled by US private equity firm Clearlake Capital alongside Todd Boehly and his investor consortium.

Crystal Palace — Features significant US private equity investment, led by Woody Johnson (owner of the NFL's New York Jets), along with Josh Harris and David Blitzer (co-owners of the Philadelphia 76ers).

Everton — Controlled by The Friedkin Group, led by American investor Dan Friedkin.

Fulham — Owned by American billionaire Shahid Khan (owner of the NFL's Jacksonville Jaguars).

Ipswich Town — Majority-owned by Gamechanger 20, a consortium backed heavily by US private equity fund ORG Portfolio Management.

Leeds United — Owned by 49ers Enterprises, the investment arm of the NFL's San Francisco 49ers.

Liverpool — Owned by Fenway Sports Group (John W. Henry and Tom Werner), owners of MLB's Boston Red Sox.

Manchester United — Majority-owned by the Glazer family through their US investment vehicle, with INEOS managing football operations as a minority shareholder.

The premier league is the clubs, so here is a breakdown (11/20). I am just waiting for them to vote for no relegation or other restrictive, risk-reducing things........Be careful what you wish for.



Arsenal — Owned by Kroenke Sports & Entertainment (Stan Kroenke), who also owns the NFL's Los Angeles Rams and NBA's Denver Nuggets.

Aston Villa — Co-owned by V Sports, a joint venture between Egyptian billionaire Nassef Sawiris and American investor Wes Edens (co-owner of the NBA's Milwaukee Bucks).

AFC Bournemouth — Owned by Black Knight Football Club, led by American businessman Bill Foley (owner of the NHL's Vegas Golden Knights).

Chelsea — Controlled by US private equity firm Clearlake Capital alongside Todd Boehly and his investor consortium.

Crystal Palace — Features significant US private equity investment, led by Woody Johnson (owner of the NFL's New York Jets), along with Josh Harris and David Blitzer (co-owners of the Philadelphia 76ers).

Everton — Controlled by The Friedkin Group, led by American investor Dan Friedkin.

Fulham — Owned by American billionaire Shahid Khan (owner of the NFL's Jacksonville Jaguars).

Ipswich Town — Majority-owned by Gamechanger 20, a consortium backed heavily by US private equity fund ORG Portfolio Management.

Leeds United — Owned by 49ers Enterprises, the investment arm of the NFL's San Francisco 49ers.

Liverpool — Owned by Fenway Sports Group (John W. Henry and Tom Werner), owners of MLB's Boston Red Sox.

Manchester United — Majority-owned by the Glazer family through their US investment vehicle, with INEOS managing football operations as a minority shareholder.

Yes, they are all shareholders and they are the ones who pursued this case.

I don't really know why you are so hell bent on defending a club that has broken the rules so relentlessly.

There was an email sent by City saying "we can do what we want". I doubt that sits well with other owners.

Like I've said the likes of Newcastle and Villa would love to do what City have done, but they can't. Instead they've had to accept taking a step back and selling their best players.

You mention Everton too. Well they've been screwed by the rules and received points deductions. If it came out that now they'd go soft on City then their fans would be furious.

These rules were brought in because United, Liverpool and Arsenal didn't want another club gatecrashing their spending spree like Chelsea did. They're not just going to roll over and say let's go light on the punishment.

I strongly believe the punishment will be heavy, otherwise why would all these clubs have invested so much money on the case?

This is about logic and a hundred quid says the minimum that will happen is Man City will face a season in the Championship.

They also know it sets a precedent if not. Newcastle will think they can break all the rules and get away with it.

All reports suggest the Premier League are looking for a tough punishment.

I think you need to look at the reality here and stop speaking like you're Man City's chief lawyer.

The premier league is the clubs, so here is a breakdown (11/20). I am just waiting for them to vote for no relegation or other restrictive, risk-reducing things........Be careful what you wish for.



Arsenal — Owned by Kroenke Sports & Entertainment (Stan Kroenke), who also owns the NFL's Los Angeles Rams and NBA's Denver Nuggets.

Aston Villa — Co-owned by V Sports, a joint venture between Egyptian billionaire Nassef Sawiris and American investor Wes Edens (co-owner of the NBA's Milwaukee Bucks).

AFC Bournemouth — Owned by Black Knight Football Club, led by American businessman Bill Foley (owner of the NHL's Vegas Golden Knights).

Chelsea — Controlled by US private equity firm Clearlake Capital alongside Todd Boehly and his investor consortium.

Crystal Palace — Features significant US private equity investment, led by Woody Johnson (owner of the NFL's New York Jets), along with Josh Harris and David Blitzer (co-owners of the Philadelphia 76ers).

Everton — Controlled by The Friedkin Group, led by American investor Dan Friedkin.

Fulham — Owned by American billionaire Shahid Khan (owner of the NFL's Jacksonville Jaguars).

Ipswich Town — Majority-owned by Gamechanger 20, a consortium backed heavily by US private equity fund ORG Portfolio Management.

Leeds United — Owned by 49ers Enterprises, the investment arm of the NFL's San Francisco 49ers.

Liverpool — Owned by Fenway Sports Group (John W. Henry and Tom Werner), owners of MLB's Boston Red Sox.

Manchester United — Majority-owned by the Glazer family through their US investment vehicle, with INEOS managing football operations as a minority shareholder.

Yes, they are all shareholders and they are the ones who pursued this case.

I don't really know why you are so hell bent on defending a club that has broken the rules so relentlessly.

There was an email sent by City saying "we can do what we want". I doubt that sits well with other owners.

Like I've said the likes of Newcastle and Villa would love to do what City have done, but they can't. Instead they've had to accept taking a step back and selling their best players.

You mention Everton too. Well they've been screwed by the rules and received points deductions. If it came out that now they'd go soft on City then their fans would be furious.

These rules were brought in because United, Liverpool and Arsenal didn't want another club gatecrashing their spending spree like Chelsea did. They're not just going to roll over and say let's go light on the punishment.

I strongly believe the punishment will be heavy, otherwise why would all these clubs have invested so much money on the case?

This is about logic and a hundred quid says the minimum that will happen is Man City will face a season in the Championship.

They also know it sets a precedent if not. Newcastle will think they can break all the rules and get away with it.

All reports suggest the Premier League are looking for a tough punishment.

I think you need to look at the reality here and stop speaking like you're Man City's chief lawyer.

I'd love to be Man citys cheif lawyer, i could buy us and do not doubt that the Premier League will severely punish them. But American private equity are only 5 votes from contol of all Premier League decisions, which is a far bigger concern. I have never wanted government oversight or a regulator but glad we have just started with one.