The fallout from the Manchester City cheating scandal will take a new turn today as the club returns to the pitch for the first time since being found guilty of more than 100 charges of financial rule-breaking.
City are expected to endure a hostile reception when they face Liverpool at Anfield after an unusually long three-week break for international matches.
The club are already facing the threat of severe footballing sanctions after an independent investigation concluded City used “sham” contracts to artificially boost their income by around £900m between 2009 and 2018.
City maintain they are innocent and have appealed against the decision.
But issues are heating up off the pitch, too, with calls for directors to be suspended, a criminal investigation into potential false accounting, and for the Government to probe the tax implications of the scandal.
However, at present, there have only been findings of wrongdoing against the club – which City deny – and not against any of the key individuals.
The i Paper looks at the central figures caught up in the fallout, and the questions they may now be facing.
: high-powered exec who feared ‘global enemies of football’ tag
Soriano, 59, was appointed as chief executive of Manchester City in 2012.
It was his vision that led to the creation of City Football Group, the holding company founded by Abu Dhabi’s Sheikh Mansour which now owns multiple clubs, including City.
He was joined by Pep Guardiola, who was manager, and Txiki Begiristain, who was director of football, during what became a period of unprecedented success.
Soriano featured heavily in discussions about the club’s strategy over financial fair play rules that came into force in 2013, hacked documents published by German newspaper eight years ago show.
After a meeting with fellow executives at the European Club Association at that time, the leaked documents show Soriano declared: “We will need to fight this, and do it in a way that is not visible, or we will be pointed out as the global enemies of football.”
At the end of the 2013 season, Soriano sacked Italian manager Roberto Mancini, meaning the club had to pay almost £10m in compensation.
With City facing a financial shortfall, Soriano suggested Abu Dhabi’s sponsor could pay a pre-agreed bonus for winning the FA Cup, even though they lost the final to Wigan, according to the documents.
In a video email circulated to all staff last week, Soriano was defiant – insisting that the rule-breaking City are accused of “could not happen, did not happen”.
But David Kogan, chair of the Government’s new Independent Football Regulator (IFR), said that the City case “raises serious issues.”
He added that the regulator “has powers to assess the suitability of owners, directors and executives”.
He vowed to “use these powers where appropriate, in the interests of protecting the sustainability, honesty and integrity of English football where there is clear evidence of wrongdoing by individuals”.
Soriano did not reply to a request for comment. He has previously said City are innocent and that the Premier League investigation is based on a “false accusation”.
Khaldoon al-Mubarak: well-connected chairman shielded by immunity
City’s chairman since the Abu Dhabi takeover in 2008, Mubarak has been there from the beginning.
Although he is not part of an Emirati royal family, Mubarak, 50, is one of the most senior advisers in the UAE government and considered by some to be a de facto “prime minister”.
He was involved in an email exchange about the £10m shortfall related to Mancini’s sacking in 2013, the leaked documents show. In the emails, he suggested Abu Dhabi “could do a backdated deal for the next two years, paid up front” to resolve the issue.
The City ruling is putting strain on British-UAE relations beyond football, and is especially uncomfortable for Andy Burnham, who was mayor of Greater Manchester between 2017 and 2026.
It emerged last week that Mubarak visited No 10 for a private meeting with Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds only days before the guilty verdict on City was announced.
However, the revealed that Mubarak was granted diplomatic immunity around six years ago which could make any efforts to take action against him more complicated.
Mubarak did not reply to a request for comment. In a letter to fans last month, he said: “The Premier League process still has a long way to run, and our confidence and intent in proving the club’s innocence is just as strong as when this began.”
There were “so many things” he wanted to share so fans “understand why we feel so confident in our position”, but he could not because of the “strict confidentiality of the legal process”.
: PR supremo who said ‘we can do what we want’
A former PR executive, Pearce has been a member of the City board since 2008 and helped broker the Abu Dhabi takeover.
He is now also vice-chairman of Melbourne City, an Australian club owned by the City Football Group.
Pearce also appears in the leaked emails.
When asked whether a suggestion to backdate funding to help resolve the 2013 shortfall would be possible, Pearce had replied: “Of course. We can do what we want.”
In another leaked email from 2010, he wrote about a £15m deal with investment company Aabar. “As we discussed, the annual direct obligation for Aabar is £3m. The remaining £12m will come from alternative sources provided by His Highness.”
City had previously claimed the Abu-Dhabi-based sponsors were independent of the state.
Pearce did not respond to a request for comment.
The bankers, lawyers and accountants
Serious questions are also being asked of bankers, lawyers, accountants and auditors who worked with City over the period.
is a London financier who allegedly helped City set up a “sham” company called Fordham Sports Management, the hacked documents suggest.
Fordham paid Manchester City for the image rights to its players. Normally, clubs sell these themselves and use the proceeds to help pay their players.
The Premier League commission said Fordham “was little more than a front for ADUG [Abu Dhabi United Group]”, which owns City.
, City’s top lawyer since 2013, was also director of Fordham for around 12 months.
The Solicitors Regulation Authority is monitoring the situation and a spokesperson said: “We will be considering the content of the Premier League’s report to see if there are any issues arising which we need to look into further.
“If, and where, we identify any suggestions of potential misconduct by solicitors or law firms, we will consider them carefully before deciding on potential next steps.”
Auditors who repeatedly signed off City’s accounts that were submitted to Companies House are also facing scrutiny.
They include accountancy firm BDO, which is facing an investigation from the regulator.
Liam Byrne, chairman of the Commons Business and Trade Committee, said the City scandal raised questions over how “the established system of audit and regulatory scrutiny [could] fail to uncover alleged misstatements of such a scale over nine years”.
Both Cliff and Rowland’s bank Rangecourt did not reply to a request for comment.
The ex-manager who said it’s not his problem…
Former Manchester City managers are also facing scrutiny.
There have been calls from tax transparency campaigners for HMRC to investigate the possibility that City had failed to pay tax of £12m related to its employment of former manager .
HMRC declined to comment, citing confidentiality rules. Mancini, who was allegedly paid a “double contract”, has denied any wrongdoing.
Asked if he was worried about any further action following the Premier League ruling, Mancini, who is now the coach of the Italian national side, said: “No… It’s not something that concerns me. It’s City’s problem, unfortunately.”
… and the former boss who has backed the club
However, , who left City earlier this year after 10 years in charge, has stood firmly behind his former employers.
In a statement posted on social media he wrote: “I want every single Man City fan to know I am here; more than ever.
“I am, always have been, always will, be behind my club, my owner, my chairman, Ferran, the players, staff, Enzo [Maresca, the manager] and you, our unique supporters. Let me be clear: we will get through this together. I love you all.”
The s and businesses
One intriguing question about the City scandal is how much members of the UAE royal families may have known, or not known, about the financial impropriety.
The City takeover in 2008 was led by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed bin Sultan Al Nahyan of Abu Dhabi – usually known just as .
He is brother of the current UAE President, Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan
“The club appreciated from the early days of [Mansour’s] ownership that very significant funds would be required if the steps needed to realise … ambitions were to be fulfilled,” the Premier League independent commission said in its ruling.
At first, it was a simple case of Mansour injecting huge amounts of cash directly into City, allowing them to break the British transfer record to sign Brazilian star Robinho in 2008.
But the commission said City later recognised this was “not a sustainable model”. With new rules designed to stop rich owners pumping money into their clubs coming in, they needed to “seek high-value sponsorship arrangements in the UAE generally and in Abu Dhabi in particular”.
The “sham” sponsorship deals with the likes of Etihad Airways were worth almost £1bn over nine seasons, the commission said. City denies this.
However, of that total, only £119m was a “base fee”, with the rest topped up by City’s Abu Dhabi owners.
According to the commission’s summary, a significant person whose name has been redacted “knew nothing” of this “sham” arrangement, prompting speculation that this could be referring to Sheikh Mansour. He did not respond to a request for comment.
Etihad, one of City’s key sponsors, has issued a statement saying it “categorically rejects” the findings of the Premier League commission and threatening it may take its own legal action.