Manchester City Found Guilty of Financial Rule Breaches and Lodges Appeal
An independent commission ruled the club used sham contracts to inflate revenue by over £900m, prompting a comprehensive appeal from Manchester City.
Headline and summary written by an AI model from the linked articles; not reviewed by a person. How this was made
First reported by News Feed, 17 min ahead of the next publisher · who breaks stories first
This story has stopped developing; this page is its permanent record. More from that day
The odds
Each tick is a source publishing on this story
Price data
| Time | Chance of yes |
|---|---|
| now | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 20:38 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 17:27 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 16:18 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 15:25 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 14:52 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 14:21 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 13:24 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 12:52 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 12:19 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 11:23 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 10:33 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 10:13 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 09:53 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 08:56 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 08:23 UTC | 27% |
| 4 Oct, 07:51 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 04:51 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 04:20 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 03:47 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 03:16 UTC | 26% |
| 4 Oct, 02:43 UTC | 26% |
| 3 Oct, 23:09 UTC | 26% |
| 3 Oct, 22:49 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 21:30 UTC | 26% |
| 3 Oct, 18:29 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 16:00 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 15:20 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 14:54 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 13:30 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 13:09 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 12:15 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 11:54 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 03:50 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 03:25 UTC | 27% |
| 3 Oct, 02:59 UTC | 28% |
| 3 Oct, 01:21 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 23:11 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 22:50 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 21:42 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 21:05 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 17:18 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 16:51 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 16:23 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 15:51 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 15:23 UTC | 29% |
| 2 Oct, 14:42 UTC | 29% |
| 2 Oct, 14:07 UTC | 29% |
| 2 Oct, 13:55 UTC | 29% |
| 2 Oct, 13:25 UTC | 29% |
| 2 Oct, 12:30 UTC | 29% |
| 2 Oct, 12:08 UTC | 29% |
| 2 Oct, 11:55 UTC | 30% |
| 2 Oct, 10:19 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 07:15 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 06:50 UTC | 28% |
| 2 Oct, 05:58 UTC | 27% |
| 2 Oct, 04:46 UTC | 27% |
| 2 Oct, 01:40 UTC | 26% |
| 2 Oct, 00:03 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 23:45 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 23:25 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 22:51 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 21:37 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 21:16 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 20:49 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 19:55 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 19:19 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 18:50 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 16:21 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 15:27 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 14:29 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 13:30 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 13:06 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 12:58 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 12:00 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 10:49 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 09:52 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 07:48 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 07:02 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 06:55 UTC | 27% |
| 1 Oct, 06:29 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 02:43 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 02:29 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 01:12 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 00:58 UTC | 26% |
| 1 Oct, 00:15 UTC | 26% |
| 30 Sept, 23:39 UTC | 26% |
| 30 Sept, 23:13 UTC | 26% |
| 30 Sept, 22:59 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 22:29 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 21:55 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 21:16 UTC | 26% |
| 30 Sept, 20:46 UTC | 26% |
| 30 Sept, 20:24 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 19:53 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 19:24 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 16:59 UTC | 30% |
| 30 Sept, 16:26 UTC | 30% |
| 30 Sept, 15:39 UTC | 30% |
| 30 Sept, 15:23 UTC | 30% |
| 30 Sept, 14:50 UTC | 30% |
| 30 Sept, 14:23 UTC | 30% |
| 30 Sept, 13:57 UTC | 34% |
| 30 Sept, 13:00 UTC | 34% |
| 30 Sept, 12:45 UTC | 33% |
| 30 Sept, 12:16 UTC | 32% |
| 30 Sept, 11:54 UTC | 27% |
| 30 Sept, 11:25 UTC | 26% |
| 30 Sept, 10:36 UTC | 27% |
| 30 Sept, 10:29 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 07:51 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 07:22 UTC | 26% |
| 30 Sept, 06:55 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 06:05 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 05:17 UTC | 27% |
| 30 Sept, 03:56 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 03:13 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 02:59 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 01:44 UTC | 24% |
| 30 Sept, 01:23 UTC | 25% |
| 30 Sept, 00:32 UTC | 24% |
| 30 Sept, 00:25 UTC | 24% |
| 29 Sept, 23:54 UTC | 24% |
| 29 Sept, 23:23 UTC | 24% |
| 29 Sept, 22:45 UTC | 23% |
| 29 Sept, 22:10 UTC | 21% |
| 29 Sept, 21:54 UTC | 21% |
| 29 Sept, 21:25 UTC | 24% |
| 29 Sept, 20:42 UTC | 24% |
| 29 Sept, 20:18 UTC | 24% |
| 29 Sept, 19:54 UTC | 24% |
| 29 Sept, 19:10 UTC | 24% |
| 29 Sept, 18:54 UTC | 26% |
| 29 Sept, 17:41 UTC | 26% |
| 29 Sept, 17:25 UTC | 25% |
| 29 Sept, 16:54 UTC | 19% |
| 29 Sept, 16:23 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 15:32 UTC | 17% |
| 29 Sept, 15:24 UTC | 17% |
| 29 Sept, 14:36 UTC | 17% |
| 29 Sept, 14:15 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 13:51 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 13:27 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 12:48 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 12:11 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 11:35 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 09:59 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 09:09 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 08:27 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 07:33 UTC | 18% |
| 29 Sept, 06:22 UTC | 19% |
| 28 Sept, 18:54 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 13:30 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 13:12 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 12:40 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 12:04 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 11:55 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 10:16 UTC | 19% |
| 28 Sept, 09:57 UTC | 19% |
| 28 Sept, 09:26 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 08:17 UTC | 16% |
| 28 Sept, 07:51 UTC | 16% |
| 28 Sept, 07:26 UTC | 17% |
| 28 Sept, 06:59 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 06:24 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 05:28 UTC | 17% |
| 28 Sept, 04:53 UTC | 17% |
| 28 Sept, 04:15 UTC | 17% |
| 28 Sept, 03:57 UTC | 17% |
| 28 Sept, 03:26 UTC | 17% |
| 28 Sept, 02:55 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 02:25 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 01:43 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 01:28 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 00:54 UTC | 18% |
| 28 Sept, 00:22 UTC | 18% |
| 27 Sept, 23:59 UTC | 18% |
| 27 Sept, 23:16 UTC | 18% |
| 27 Sept, 22:53 UTC | 18% |
| 27 Sept, 21:43 UTC | 22% |
| 27 Sept, 21:15 UTC | 22% |
| 27 Sept, 19:33 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 19:20 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 18:27 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 17:59 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 17:13 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 16:59 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 16:16 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 15:59 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 15:24 UTC | 20% |
| 27 Sept, 14:45 UTC | 18% |
| 27 Sept, 14:24 UTC | 19% |
| 27 Sept, 13:22 UTC | 19% |
| 27 Sept, 12:55 UTC | 18% |
| 27 Sept, 12:21 UTC | 18% |
| 27 Sept, 11:54 UTC | 18% |
| 27 Sept, 11:06 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 10:51 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 10:22 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 09:57 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 06:34 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 05:43 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 05:23 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 04:18 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 03:53 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 03:06 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 02:58 UTC | 21% |
| 27 Sept, 01:17 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 23:00 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 21:24 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 20:36 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 20:28 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 19:07 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 18:34 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 18:26 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 17:14 UTC | 18% |
| 26 Sept, 16:56 UTC | 17% |
| 26 Sept, 16:03 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 15:56 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 15:23 UTC | 19% |
| 26 Sept, 14:37 UTC | 18% |
| 26 Sept, 14:19 UTC | 17% |
| 26 Sept, 13:50 UTC | 17% |
| 26 Sept, 13:06 UTC | 16% |
| 26 Sept, 12:58 UTC | 18% |
| 26 Sept, 12:22 UTC | 18% |
| 26 Sept, 11:29 UTC | 19% |
| 26 Sept, 10:59 UTC | 19% |
| 26 Sept, 10:13 UTC | 19% |
| 26 Sept, 09:57 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 09:24 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 08:30 UTC | 20% |
| 26 Sept, 08:22 UTC | 18% |
| 26 Sept, 06:55 UTC | 16% |
| 26 Sept, 06:25 UTC | 16% |
| 26 Sept, 05:24 UTC | 21% |
| 26 Sept, 04:52 UTC | 25% |
| 26 Sept, 04:01 UTC | 27% |
| 26 Sept, 03:53 UTC | 28% |
| 26 Sept, 03:23 UTC | 31% |
| 26 Sept, 02:24 UTC | 27% |
| 26 Sept, 01:54 UTC | 27% |
| 26 Sept, 01:04 UTC | 27% |
| 26 Sept, 00:49 UTC | 26% |
| 26 Sept, 00:25 UTC | 26% |
| 25 Sept, 23:37 UTC | 26% |
| 25 Sept, 23:29 UTC | 26% |
| 25 Sept, 22:54 UTC | 24% |
| 25 Sept, 22:22 UTC | 25% |
| 25 Sept, 21:55 UTC | 23% |
| 25 Sept, 21:27 UTC | 23% |
| 25 Sept, 20:39 UTC | 24% |
| 25 Sept, 20:25 UTC | 24% |
| 25 Sept, 19:53 UTC | 25% |
| 25 Sept, 19:25 UTC | 27% |
| 25 Sept, 18:43 UTC | 25% |
| 25 Sept, 18:29 UTC | 26% |
| 25 Sept, 17:52 UTC | 22% |
| 25 Sept, 17:06 UTC | 20% |
| 25 Sept, 16:58 UTC | 19% |
| 25 Sept, 16:19 UTC | 21% |
| 25 Sept, 15:57 UTC | 23% |
| 25 Sept, 15:27 UTC | 18% |
| 25 Sept, 14:54 UTC | 15% |
| 24 Sept, 14:39 UTC | 5% |
Replay the odds, article by article
Step through each article in the order it published and watch Will Manchester City be relegated from the 2026-27 Premier League? respond.
The story so far
8 publishers have covered this in 13 articles since 29 Sept 2026. News Feed published first, on 29 September at 16:37 UTC; feeds.bleacherreport.com followed 18 min later. The most recent article, from BBC Sport, appeared on 2 October at 22:30 UTC.
Outlets reporting it: News Feed (major outlet), The Guardian Sport (major outlet), Bloomberg.com (major outlet), feeds.bleacherreport.com, South China Morning Post, BBC Sport, France 24 - International breaking news, top stories and headlines, Latest articles.
3 prediction markets price this story:
- Will Manchester City be relegated from the 2026-27 Premier League? — the market puts it at 26%, with $1k traded in the last 24 hours, closing 1 Jul 2027. The market resolves to "Yes" if Manchester City loses its place in the Premier League for the following season due to its final standing, a playoff defeat, or an official league decision during the 2026-27 season. It resolves to "No" if the team remains in the league or if the season is cancelled or postponed after June 30, 2027, at 11:59 PM ET.
- Manchester City: 75+ Points — the market puts it at 37%, with $15 traded in the last 24 hours, closing 13 Jun 2027. Manchester City must earn at least 75 points during the 2026-27 English Premier League season for the outcome to be Yes. The resolution depends solely on their final league standing in that specific season, not on any financial regulations or past convictions.
- Manchester City — the market puts it at 21%, with $2k traded in the last 24 hours, closing 13 Jun 2027. The market resolves to Yes if Manchester City wins the 2026-27 English Premier League title. It resolves to No if they do not win that specific championship. Readers often mistake the resolution date for the end of the current season or confuse this with any other league title.
Odds are the market's probability that the outcome happens, updated every few minutes. They are information about what traders expect, not a forecast we make and not investment advice.
How it unfolded
Every source in the order it published, with the odds on Will Manchester City be relegated from the 2026-27 Premier League? at that moment. A dash means the source published before we started tracking prices.
- News FeedManchester City artificially boosted finances by more than £900mn, says panel18%
- feeds.bleacherreport.comPremier League Says Manchester City Inflated Revenues By $1 Billion Using 'Sham Contracts'19%▲1 points since the previous source
- South China Morning PostManchester City guilty of using ‘sham’ deals to distort finances, Premier League says24%▲5 points since the previous source
- BBC Sport£1.2bn on transfers with £830m inflated in accounts - Man City's 'asterisk era'25%
- France 24 - International breaking news, top stories and headlinesMan City scandal: 'Sham' deals and inflated revenues25%
- The Guardian SportManchester City could be forced to pay Premier League up to £50m in legal costs32%▲7 points since the previous source
- Latest articlesLegal challenges could prolong Manchester City saga for years26%▼5 points since the previous source
- South China Morning PostManchester City scandal risks damaging Premier League’s booming global brand27%▲1 points since the previous source
- The Guardian SportAndy Burnham’s Manchester City comments stir fresh tensions with Premier League27%
- Bloomberg.comManchester City Accused of ‘Sham’ Contracts, Facing Possible Relegation26%
Show 3 later sources
- France 24 - International breaking news, top stories and headlinesManchester City appeal judgement that club breached Premier League financial rules28%▲2 points since the previous source
- South China Morning PostManchester City lodge ‘comprehensive’ appeal against verdict in financial-rules scandal29%▲1 points since the previous source
- BBC SportWhich clubs did Man City's 'inflated' money flow to in transfer market?28%▼1 points since the previous source
- Current odds26%
Sources
Every article we clustered into this story. Headlines link to the publisher.
- Manchester City Accused of ‘Sham’ Contracts, Facing Possible Relegation Bloomberg.com ·
- Andy Burnham’s Manchester City comments stir fresh tensions with Premier League The Guardian Sport ·
- Manchester City could be forced to pay Premier League up to £50m in legal costs The Guardian Sport ·
- Manchester City artificially boosted finances by more than £900mn, says panel News Feed ·
- Which clubs did Man City's 'inflated' money flow to in transfer market? BBC Sport
- Manchester City lodge ‘comprehensive’ appeal against verdict in financial-rules scandal South China Morning Post
Show 7 more sources
- Manchester City appeal judgement that club breached Premier League financial rules France 24 - International breaking news, top stories and headlines
- Manchester City scandal risks damaging Premier League’s booming global brand South China Morning Post
- Legal challenges could prolong Manchester City saga for years Latest articles
- Man City scandal: 'Sham' deals and inflated revenues France 24 - International breaking news, top stories and headlines
- £1.2bn on transfers with £830m inflated in accounts - Man City's 'asterisk era' BBC Sport
- Manchester City guilty of using ‘sham’ deals to distort finances, Premier League says South China Morning Post
- Premier League Says Manchester City Inflated Revenues By $1 Billion Using 'Sham Contracts' feeds.bleacherreport.com
Related prediction markets
Linked by software because they are about the same subject. Most ask a different question from the one this story reports, so read each market's own question. How often the link is right
- Polymarket Will Manchester City be relegated from the 2026-27 Premier League? 26% −1
Does the market have this right?
Wrong market?
- Kalshi Manchester City: 75+ Points 37% +1
Does the market have this right?
Wrong market?
- Kalshi Manchester City 21% +1
Does the market have this right?
Wrong market?
Have your say
Your call. How does this end?
Free, no money involved. Calls are scored against the market's price when you make them, so backing an underdog that wins scores most. Leaderboard · Your calls
Email me when the odds move
In this story
- Manchester City
- Premier League
- Andy Burnham