How Man City plan to argue their innocence in appeal

· Sky-PL

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.

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.

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.

Why Man City's appeal could drag into 2027

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 has told Sky Sports News that 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.

Read the original

Related