29 Mar 2026 05:55:47
Would gladly wait for the City punishment until the summer,
Then a 60 point deduction, two year transfer ban, and a hefty fine of say £40-50m all coming into effect from August 2026.
That's the least we should expect to see in my opinion.
1.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 08:33:27
Even if it does happen, City can still appeal it and drag it out for another year or two. Wouldn't expect anything to happen in the immediate future, really.
2.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 09:44:35
There's no chance the corrupt league will hit their corrupt mates with a 60 point deduction. Whatever they do get hit with, they'll appeal and get a reduction anyway. I'd be very surprised if it was more than 12 points. It should be a point for every charge, frozen wage bill, transfer ban, and title stripping for all years in question, but of course that would require the league to actually have some integrity.
Whatever happens, I guarantee disappointment for everyone bar City.
3.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 12:34:53
Was it a corrupt league last season?
4.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 12:35:05
Bloody hell, I think it's time to lower expectations. A few million in fines and a suspended transfer ban is more than likely for City. Then, hopefully, this farce of a court case can be put to bed.
5.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 12:55:05
Everton n Forest got pts deducted because let's face it, they haven't got the money like Citeh Chelsea to fight it. If Chelsea would have got banned or demoted they would have just done what Citeh have done n dragged it through the courts for years, but they'll take the fine with glee n that's all I can see happening to Citeh.
{Ed001's Note - Chelsea were not given points as they self-reported and helped with the investigation. If they had not reported it, no one would ever have known about it. They also turned over everything to the FA and Premier League to go through, while Citeh tried to be obstructive and block access to their files, even though all clubs sign a contract when they join the Premier League which agrees to give free access to the Prem and FA to their books.
It is two totally different cases. Chelsea was all done under Abramovich, while Citeh are being investigated because of what has happened under the current owner. Can people stop spouting ignorant nonsense and whining about it without actually having a bloody clue. It is so tedious reading all the whinging about nothing.}
6.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 13:10:20
Could there ever be a suitable and fitting punishment for all their 'alleged misdemeanours', points deduction, transfer ban, fine? All temporary and nothing more than a kick in the shins.
Would they be where they are today, whether or not 'alleged misdemeanours' took place?
Maybe, eventually.
All titles expunged, removed from history, never happened.
Whatever, if any punishment received won't really change anything, a temporary blip on life's pathway.
There can never be anything remotely fitting, but we know!
7.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 13:16:31
Chelsea was entirely different from City, so I'm not sure why people keep bringing it up as a comparison. They were the ones who reported the inconsistencies in their accounts themselves after the new owners took over and found out about it.
They could have easily kept quiet about it and the league would likely not have found out about it at all. They also cooperated with the league fully afterwards, so they have a lot of points going in their mitigation.
8.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 13:30:24
That may very well be the case, Dracred, but every other club not named Chelsea would have a very good argument for the punishments being harsher. They signed a fair few top players in that period that got them a considerable amount of success and points at the expense of everybody else in the league.
What's to stop any other team doing the same thing and then reporting it themselves a few years down the line? (Granted they would have to sell the team to somebody else before they report it haha).
{Ed001's Note - no they haven't. That is just ignorant nonsense. No other club has a good argument for it being harsher. They might whine like the fans do, but there is no good argument for anything, just petty whining.}
9.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 13:41:17
It's gone on too long now. Took about a week to dish out the blues****s punishment. I'd strip them of everything they won in that period and replace the record with cheated. Then have Prem records show no 1st place foul play at hand. Embarrass the whole lot.
10.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 13:44:49
What rot, PB.
11.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 14:07:59
The Irish Rover!!, I'm assuming you're suggesting the league wasn't corrupt because we won it, which in turn suggests that your idea of corruption is match fixing, referee bias and manipulated VAR decisions. That's a very small-minded view to have. When I'm talking about corruption I mean brown envelopes, back handers, offshore accounts, cooked books, hush money and that sort of thing.
And, answer your question, yes I believe the league was corrupt last year, and every other year. I don't think there's a major organisation under wing of UEFA that isn't corrupt to some extent.
12.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 14:19:53
There's no chance the corrupt league will hit their corrupt mates with a 60 point deduction."
Chewy, that suggests to me that you think the PL are just in cahoots with City only? I will wait for any damning evidence against the PL before I go about calling foul.
13.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 15:25:41
No, that's not what I'm insinuating I'm making. Suggesting two entities are corrupt doesn't automatically mean that corruption exists solely between the two. I'm afraid you've misunderstood me. I'm simply implying the league is not impervious to corruption, I'm not suggesting they have some sort of uniquely corrupt partnership with City.
Whilst I can appreciate that some, like yourself, would demand concrete proof, personally, I've seen enough corruption in football, and many other sports, to be convinced that no organisation is completely free from foul play of some sort.
14.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 15:50:50
My point was not to have a go at Chelsea or even Citeh, it was to have a go at the lilly livered prem league, they done Everton n Forest quickly.but because Chelsea n Citeh are mega bucked with lawyers everywhere, they could fight anything for however long if they wanted, costing the prem league 10s of millions in legal fees.So ED001 since you seem to know all about it, do you think the punishment to Chelsea was adequate because they complied or do you think they should have been let off because it was a different owner group to who owns them now
{Ed001's Note - Chelsea didn't fight it, it took time because there were years of accounts to go through. The punishment was probably about right, they did everything right under the new owners so anything worse would have been very harsh and not encouraged others to come forward in future.}
15.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 17:21:27
ED001, Fair play to Chelsea, they done all what was asked of them and still got a big fine, what do you think will or should happen to Citeh.I can't see what everyone is hoping for, only because of how they would fight tooth n nail over every charge and I don't think whoever runs the prem league are up for the fight
{Ed001's Note - they should be stripped of all titles, other than that, I think they deserve at least one relegation.}
16.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 18:21:29
Have you all heard of the Mandela Effect. When a large group of people share the same false memory. Like the Monopoly man wearing a monocle when he actually does not. Well, perhaps City are hoping that takes effect, and we all think we remember they have been punished when they actually haven't. The Premier League board will all sit there in a year's time and be happy about how they punished City when actually they forgot to do it, and it's all a false memory.
There is more chance of that happening than an actual substantial punishment ever being brought. It will be a fine that will be paid out of the owners' spare change purse and a suspended transfer ban. If anything at all.
17.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 18:33:25
They should definitely be stripped of all those titles they won. But I am not in favour of those titles being handed over to the 2nd placed sides. A bit meaningless those titles would feel honestly.
18.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 18:53:16
Cheers for the replies ED001, would the titles go to the 2nd place team or just have no champions on them years
{Ed001's Note - just be stripped.}
19.) 29 Mar 2026
29 Mar 2026 21:05:54
Are you saying that Mandela didn't exist, Kim?
20.) 30 Mar 2026
30 Mar 2026 07:09:15
Titles stripped and any prize monies 'earned' must be paid back and redistributed to the teams that came runner up. They have to receive some level of transfer ban and hefty fine imo.
{Ed025's Note - any monies should be distributed to grass roots football for me LN..
21.) 30 Mar 2026
30 Mar 2026 07:18:18
1) Strip them of the titles, that's a given.
2) Relegate them this season.
3) Ban them from the PL for 4 more seasons.
Sounds about right for me.
22.) 30 Mar 2026
30 Mar 2026 08:33:24
The thing with Chelsea is that they are very good at exploiting loopholes (which is fair enough), but they do seem to be one of a very select band who cause the rules to be changed. Clubs can't even sell their hotels or their women's team to themselves anymore.
23.) 30 Mar 2026
30 Mar 2026 12:42:22
I'm with Ron. Just strip their titles with an asterisk next to those seasons, and leave that side alone, along with a 3 year transfer ban.
As for relegation, part of me actually wants them to stay up (with a healthy point deduction for each season they were found guilty), so that they can go to every PL away ground with the home fans chanting "Cheats" each time they get the ball and whenever they score a goal.
As for comparing Chelsea with City, people need to go do their research, really.
24.) 31 Mar 2026
31 Mar 2026 03:35:18
Where should people research, @Oli? Where did you do your researching, if I may ask?