Steve 🐝

If Manchester City supporters are firing back, it’s because we refuse, as Simon Bajkowski of the Manchester Evening News so eloquently put it, to “play the sad clowns that the deluded circus demand.” And let’s be clear: this entire legal process, together with the relentless outrage from partisan media and punditry, has become a circus that stinks to high heaven. Before Sheikh Mansour bought Manchester City in 2008, the Cartel was firmly in control of English football. The established Incumbent Four had won 15 of 16 Premier League titles. They occupied every Champions League qualification spot for three consecutive seasons. City had won none. Then City emerged as a genuine challenger to the established order, thanks to an owner with the resources necessary to compete with the Incumbent Four. And suddenly, protecting football’s “financial sustainability” became the great crusade. Shockingly, the rules that emerged—tying permissible spending to existing commercial revenue—overwhelmingly favored the Incumbent Four. The clubs that had spent decades building their financial advantages could continue spending accordingly. Challengers seeking to close the gap would face an entirely different set of constraints. The established order had built its advantage. Now the rules would help preserve it. In March 2019, the Premier League, with Richard Masters serving as interim CEO, opened an investigation into whether City had violated its financial rules. Masters would later become the League’s permanent CEO through an appointment process reportedly influenced by United and Liverpool. Nearly four years later, on February 6, 2023, in the midst of what would become City’s historic treble-winning season, the Club was formally charged. The timing alone raises legitimate questions about the influence of partisan interests within the League. The commission tasked with hearing the charges was then constituted under the authority of a Judicial Panel chair appointed through a process involving Masters and the Premier League. And so the cloud hanging over City continued for an absurdly long time. Finally, on September 29, 2026, we received a guilty verdict. But that verdict came with a few rather extraordinary asterisks. First, we don’t get to know who actually rendered the verdict. The identities of the commission members remain undisclosed. Second, we don’t get to see the underlying evidence the commission supposedly analyzed—at least not yet. Instead, we’re given a 40-page, heavily redacted decision setting out the commission’s findings, while the evidence underlying those findings and the supporting appendices remain outside public scrutiny. We’re simply expected to accept on blind faith that an anonymous commission conducted its proceedings without bias, fairly evaluated the evidence, and reached conclusions fully supported by that evidence. Perhaps it did. But how is anyone outside the proceedings supposed to make that judgment? 1/2 #mancity