Manchester City lodged their formal appeal at 7pm on Thursday, October 1, 2026, four days after a Premier League independent commission found the club guilty on 114 of the 115 charges it faced. The club calls the commission’s opinion “unsafe” and says it rests on “clear material errors, of law, principle and fact.”
City’s position is that they have submitted “a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence” in support of their innocence. The Athletic FC Podcast, in an episode titled “Why do Man City think they can win their appeal?”, walked through why the club’s lawyers believe the ruling can be overturned, or the punishment reduced.
The Abu Dhabi funding argument
The commission found City had arranged “sham” contracts with commercial partners between 2009-10 and 2017-18, artificially inflating revenues and reducing costs by more than £900 million through what it called a “Disguised Funding Scheme.” It also found the club had made off-book payments to staff and had failed to cooperate with the Premier League’s investigation.
City’s central appeal argument is that the key sponsorships were funded by the Abu Dhabi government, not by owner Sheikh Mansour or his investment vehicle Abu Dhabi United Group. If the money came from a state source rather than from the owner personally, City contend, there is no related-party inflation of the kind the commission found.
Read also: Thomas Tuchel on Harry Kane: ‘That is what drives him’
The commission has already addressed that argument. In its ruling it concluded the Abu Dhabi government explanation had been “concocted well after the event in an attempt to obscure and conceal the realities of the Disguised Funding Scheme.”
A new panel, a tight clock
The appeal will be heard in private by a new three-person independent panel, separate from the one that delivered the guilty verdict. Under Premier League rules introduced before this season, the panel must open the hearing within 12 weeks of an appeal being filed, and issue its decision within 30 days of the hearing’s conclusion.
Running those deadlines from October 1 would push the final verdict to no later than January 23, 2027, if the fast-track rule holds.
That is a significant if. A handbook clause introduced in the summer of 2026 allows those timeframes to be suspended “when deemed necessary,” and City are expected to argue that the new rules should not be applied retroactively to a case that began years earlier.
Read also: John Fury refuses to attend son Tyson’s Joshua fight
Sky Sports’ Kaveh Solhekol captured the uncertainty: “Although we thought the appeal could be done and dusted by Christmas and we’d have a decision in January, I’m now not so sure that is the case.”
Overturning the verdict, or shrinking the punishment
Even if the appeal panel upholds the commission’s core findings, City can still fight on the sanction itself. No punishment has yet been handed down. The three-person panel that convicted the club will also preside over the sanctions hearing, and the possible outcomes range from a points deduction and a fine to, in the most serious case, expulsion from the Premier League.
City also have no route to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, because Premier League rules require disputes to be resolved within England and Wales. The appeal panel’s ruling will therefore be close to the last word in football’s own system, unless the club takes the extraordinary step of challenging the outcome in the civil courts.
The Football Association has signaled it may launch its own investigation off the back of the verdict, which could expose City to further sanctions once the Premier League process is complete.
Read also: Guardiola is getting back to Manchester City regardless of FFP accusations
Under the fast-track clock, the appeal hearing must open no later than around Christmas week. Until then, City have said they are “necessarily restricted in what we can say further until all proceedings are complete.”
Read also: Simeone receives a danish midfielder for Atletico Madrid
