Breaking News : UEFA warned Premier League FFP charges for Man City could cause ‘mutiny’ .

Man City’s Premier League FFP charges may spark a “mutiny.” Manchester City is compiling evidence to refute the Premier League’s severe accusations, which have the potential to alter the course of the game.UEFA has been cautioned that any resolution to the Premier League’s charges against Manchester City will “virtually certainly incite mutiny among its member clubs” in the event of a consequence.

Since last week’s ruling in which the league deducted 10 points from Everton for a violation of Financial Fair Play regulations, the matter has been brought into sharper focus, and a new wave of speculation has emerged regarding the potential ramifications of that decision on any future sanctions that City may face, should the case against them be proven.

The Premier League levied a series of severe allegations against City earlier this year, including allegations that the club had misrepresented its finances to the relevant football authorities for nearly a decade. The club vigorously rejects any allegation that they have violated competition regulations. They will have the opportunity to present their case before an impartial tribunal that will evaluate the available evidence.

The extensive inquiry conducted by the Premier League was subsequent to a comparable examination conducted by UEFA in 2020, which determined that City had violated their financial fair play regulations and warranted a two-year suspension from the Champions League. Despite the reversal of the decision by the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), which found City culpable for nothing more than non-compliance with the UEFA investigation, which the club maintained was defective, public opinion continued to hold City accountable.

Other clubs have expressed interest in additional scrutiny of the Blues, and the Premier League has been functioning during a period when its own governance has been called into question by external forces. The decision to level such grave accusations against the English champions was met with widespread surprise, including the Premier League’s official website, which initially published inaccurate information regarding the specific charges against City. The announcement came precisely twenty-four hours prior to the release of a White Paper on football governance reform by the British government.At the time, three out of every four football fans surveyed in a brief public opinion poll believed City had violated the rules, and Pep Guardiola stated that the club had not been given an opportunity to defend itself prior to being publicly condemned. As the club formulates an extensive legal defense for the impartial panel, it appears inexorably that any ruling will have far-reaching ramifications for the sport and the multitude of clubs striving for supremacy.

In their publication for the International Sports Law Review, Dr. Dan Plumley and Dr. Gregory Ioannidis assert: “While the authors abstain from expressing any prognostications regarding the resolution of this issue, a single certainty remains: the self-regulatory autonomy of sport is imperiled with peril.

“Various dynamics are at play, each exerting influence over the decision-making process of a stakeholder.” Regardless of the outcome of the ongoing dispute, it is highly probable that UEFA will encounter significant discontent from its member clubs, potentially leading to a mutiny.The financial prowess of football clubs such as Manchester City, with the expert lawyers taking apart the inefficiency and complexity of the regulations (contra preferentem comes to mind), can only demonstrate how weak such regulations are in their application.”

While any outcome is likely to kick off another fierce debate on the worth of financial fair play rules and the value in independent regulation, the hearing will have serious and material consequences for City and the Premier League. The charges are unprecedented in their nature, and so vast that industry experts expect it to be years before the matter is resolved.

From what little is known publicly about the case, and findings from the CAS verdict, it is entirely possible that City could be found guilty of not co-operating with another investigation. However, Ioannidis (leading sports lawyer and professor at Sheffield Hallam University) and Plumley (sports finance expert and also at Sheffield Hallam University) contend that the Premier League must instead prove its most damning allegations – held to a higher standard than a normal civil case because of their seriousness – to satisfy the judging panel.”It would not be good enough for the Premier League to argue that Manchester City failed to co-operate with the Premier League’s investigation,” they write. “The Premier League would have to go beyond this, by proving that Manchester City, as a matter of fact and evidence, failed to produce accurate financial information (and/or lied about it) in relation to their revenue, within the meaning of the current regulations.

“This is not an easy burden for the Premier League. But it should not be easy, because the allegations produced are of a very serious nature.”Should the Premier League be able to discharge such a burden, the burden will then shift to Manchester City, who would, in turn, have to respond, and attempt to discharge it. The sliding scale, therefore, of the standard of proof, will be in full force and action here.

“Advisors must, therefore, make a note that the weight of the evidence and the manner in which it is presented, may be the deciding factors in the final decision making of the Panel.”

Extracts from International Sports Law Review reproduced by permission of Thomson Reuters Sweet & Maxwell and the authors: © Thomson Reuters and Contributors 2023