𝗠𝗮𝗻 𝗖𝗶𝘁𝘆 #𝟭𝟭𝟱 - 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗻𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘄? Per the excellent exclusive reporting from @David_Ornstein we now know that the Independent Commission has found Man City guilty of all bar one charge (I believe they were charged with 130 individual rule breaches). In his article, David asserts that sanctions are yet to be determined and that no appeal has yet been launched. This means we’re at the stage where the parties have recently received the written decision, clarifying whether each charge has been proven and how. Normally in a Premier League Section W disciplinary proceeding, such an outcome would not be public at this stage. Leaking it is against the rules because the proceedings are supposed to remain private and confidential. Only full awards (decisions with the punishments) are supposed to be public. Man City might argue that the Premier League leaked it (which seems likely based on reported rumours) and seek some form of relief. The challenge Man City will have is that they themselves already breached this rule. They published that no decision had yet been reached as of November 2025 in their 24/25 financial statements. This statement breached confidentiality. I doubt they will be able to claim much in the way of relief for such a rule breach. 𝙎𝙤 𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙙𝙤 𝙬𝙚 𝙜𝙤 𝙛𝙧𝙤𝙢 𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚? Well, conventionally there would be a hearing now on what sanctions should apply where the PL Board and Man City can put forward arguments for what they believe the sanctions should be. The Panel then decides on the sanctions, adds their explanation to the decision and publishes it. After that, Man City could appeal the decision and/or punishment applied. However, the rules permit for some deviation from this process. 1) The PL Board could publish the written decision immediately if they believe it is of wider application to the PL and its clubs. Given the leak, this is a possibility now. This would mean seeing the decision before any punishments have been decided. 2) Man City (or the PL) could apply to appeal the decision now, before the hearing on sanctions. Whether this would run concurrently with the hearing (and decision) on sanctions or sequentially, I do not know. The rules do not specify and there is no precedent. I doubt anyone knows, even the PL. Incidentally, it is possible one of the reasons this was leaked is because the PL Board were worried that Man City might try this mid-process appeal, in order to keep the outcome unknown for longer. 𝘼𝙣𝙮 𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙚𝙖𝙡 𝙬𝙤𝙪𝙡𝙙 𝙡𝙞𝙠𝙚𝙡𝙮 𝙣𝙤𝙩 𝙩𝙖𝙠𝙚 𝙖𝙨 𝙡𝙤𝙣𝙜 𝙖𝙨 𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙮 𝙛𝙚𝙖𝙧 𝙩𝙝𝙤𝙪𝙜𝙝. The Section W disciplinary rules were updated for this season. They require any appeal to be concluded within 12 weeks of submission and any decision provided within 30 days after that. Deviation from these timings requires justification. They can’t be slower than this without cause. The reality is that any appeal by Man City on the facts of the case will be incredibly difficult (those almost always are) and an appeal on the law will be challenging too given just how much of this ground was already covered by City’s legal team in the APT hearing. Former Supreme Court Justice, Lord Dyson, chaired that panel and he will almost certainly chair any Appeal Board on this case. He dismissed all of the arguments Lord Pannick made that Man City could have used to undermine the case on the 115. So Man City would need grounds for the appeal and might not even have them. Until the decision is published in full, we cannot assess this…

JUST IN: Content creator Bonnie Blue auctions off the naming rights to her unborn baby, with “$SOLANA” reportedly leading the bidding at $30,000.