City's 115 charges: a December hearing and the arithmetic
Manchester City's appeal against the independent commission's verdict on their financial rule breaches is reported to be scheduled for mid-December, with a hearing expected to run for several days. The Financial Times reported the date this week, citing people with knowledge of the process. If the appeal fails, sanctions would follow early next year, which means City could play most of this season without knowing their final points total.
Where the case stands
In September the Premier League announced that an independent commission had found City guilty of 114 of the 115 charges brought against them, covering a nine-season period between 2009 and 2018. The league's statement said the club were guilty of all charges relating to serious breaches of its financial rules, and of the majority of the charges relating to the failure to cooperate with the investigation. The verdict ran to around 40 pages.
The commission found that City had used what it called sham contracts and sham agreements to inflate revenue and reduce costs, and that the arrangements were worth more than 900 million pounds across the period. City have denied wrongdoing throughout and say they hold an irrefutable body of evidence that the sponsors were companies of the Abu Dhabi government rather than of the club's owner, Abu Dhabi United Group. The club lodged its appeal on 1 October.
Why December matters
Under the league's rules the appeal process is required to conclude within 12 weeks of starting. Counting from 1 October, that sets an outside date in the final week of December, which is why a mid-December hearing fits the timetable and why a ruling before the new year is possible. Reports suggest the appeal will be heard by a separate panel, and that punishment would be decided after the appeal is resolved rather than alongside it.
That sequencing is the reason the case has sat unresolved through the autumn. City have played every league match since the verdict without a sanction, because the rules do not provide for an interim penalty while an appeal is pending. Rival clubs have complained about that, and the league has said nothing about a provisional deduction. The consequence is a table that everyone can read but nobody can trust: the side in third may finish the season on a negative total.
What the commission can impose
The range of sanctions available is wide, and the reporting around the case has listed the same options repeatedly:
- A financial penalty, which for a club of City's revenue would have to be of a different order to the fines imposed for administrative breaches.
- A points deduction, the sanction that matters most in a league table, with figures of 20, 30 and 50 points discussed in the press.
- Expulsion from the Premier League, which exists in the rule book and has not been used in the Premier League era.
- Voiding of titles, which the Express reported as one of the options under discussion.
None of these is confirmed. The commission has not published a sanction, the league has not set a date for one, and the club has not commented on any specific figure. The 50-point figure that circulates most often would be the largest in the competition's history, above the 30 points Luton Town were docked in 2008/09, and it would be imposed on a club that has won the title eight times.
The arithmetic
City are third on 21 points from ten matches, with seven wins, no draws and three defeats, 21 goals scored and 13 conceded. Arsenal lead on 27, Brighton have 22 and Liverpool 18. The table below applies the reported deduction figures to City's current total. It is arithmetic, not a forecast: the commission has discretion, the size of any deduction is unknown, and an appeal could change all of it.
| Deduction | City total | Where that would sit |
|---|---|---|
| None | 21 | Third, six behind Arsenal |
| 20 points | 1 | Bottom, six behind Palace |
| 30 points | -9 | Bottom, 16 behind Palace |
| 50 points | -29 | Bottom, 36 behind Palace |
The middle two rows are the ones that matter for the title race. A 20-point deduction would end it in February. A 30-point deduction would put City below the current bottom club at a stroke, which is why the argument about the size of the penalty has been conducted in public for two months.
The sporting cost while it runs
City's season has already turned. They lost 3-1 at Nottingham Forest on 7 November, their third defeat in ten, and the gap to Arsenal is six points. A deduction applied next year would be taken from the total at the time it is imposed, which is why the timing matters as much as the size: 20 points in February leaves a title chase, the same 20 points in May leaves nothing at all.
There is a second, quieter cost. Recruitment, contract renewals and the wage structure all depend on which European competition the club is in, and nobody at the club can say which that will be next season. The same uncertainty runs through the table for everyone else: Brighton in second and Liverpool in fourth are separated by four points from a club that may finish the campaign on a negative total, and the clubs chasing European places cannot plan around it either.
What is not known
No hearing date has been confirmed by the Premier League or by the club, and no panel has been named. The December timetable comes from reporting, not from an official announcement. City have not said whether they would challenge a failed appeal in the courts, and the league has not said when a sanction would take effect within a season. Until one of those things is confirmed, the only firm numbers are these: 21 points, third place, six behind the leaders, and a case that will not be settled before December.
For the club's league form in the meantime, see the Premier League section; the prices for the title race, with all of this factored in, are on the betting page.