Playing for 90
Fansided

Opinion: Despite CAS ruling, Manchester City are still guilty

By Keith Lisenbee

SOUTHAMPTON, ENGLAND - JULY 05: Josep Guardiola of Manchester City during the Premier League match between Southampton FC and Manchester City at St Mary's Stadium on July 05, 2020 in Southampton, England. Football Stadiums around Europe remain empty due to the Coronavirus Pandemic as Government social distancing laws prohibit fans inside venues resulting in games being played behind closed doors. (Photo by Robin Jones/Getty Images)
SOUTHAMPTON, ENGLAND - JULY 05: Josep Guardiola of Manchester City during the Premier League match between Southampton FC and Manchester City at St Mary's Stadium on July 05, 2020 in Southampton, England. Football Stadiums around Europe remain empty due to the Coronavirus Pandemic as Government social distancing laws prohibit fans inside venues resulting in games being played behind closed doors. (Photo by Robin Jones/Getty Images) /
facebooktwitterreddit
Prev
1 of 3
Next
Manchester City
Bernardo Silva, Raheem Sterling, and Gabriel Jesus, Manchester City (Photo by Catherine Ivill/Getty Images) /

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) overturned Manchester City’s ban on European football. The ruling did not entirely exonerate the club.

In February, the European football authority, UEFA, banned MCFC from European football for the next two seasons and fined them €30 million for violating Financial Fair Play (FFP) regulations and failing to cooperate with their investigation.

UEFA’s case rested on evidence that City had disguised the amount of money it had received from its sponsorship deal from Etihad Airlines and their balance statements from 2012 to 2016.

In February, I argued in a column that football governing bodies should not dictate to football owners how much money they can spend on their clubs. As football clubs in England are private businesses, it is the investment of money in a free market that has made the Premier League the best league in the world.

FFP was designed to keep clubs from overspending beyond their means on players, coaches, and facilities by only spending cash earned in revenues rather than through additional investment by owners.

These regulations were intended to even the playing field for current club owners; however, the unintended consequence was to protect the current establishment from hyper-aggressive new owners and entities.

I argued in my column that FFP’s only role should be to enforce regulations on fraud and other deceptions of reality.

UEFA ruled in February that Manchester City had committed fraud and deception in its accounting and reporting practices. In my column, I agreed that the club should be punished for these reasons, but not for the spending of cash for its business interests.

I still stand behind this opinion.

Home/Manchester City