The Waiting Game: Why City's 115 Case Delays May Actually Work in Their Favour
The clock keeps ticking on City's defining legal battle, and the silence from the International Dispute Resolution Centre grows more deafening by the week.
What was supposed to be resolved by early spring has now stretched into what many expect will be a late summer verdict at the earliest - and possibly not until after the 2025/26 season is well underway.
For City supporters, the extended timeline represents both frustration and quiet optimism. The longer this drags on, the more it suggests the independent commission is wrestling with complex evidence rather than rubber-stamping a predetermined outcome.
The numbers alone tell the story of the case's complexity. When the Premier League charged City in 2023, its press release detailed alleged rules breaches that added up to 115 in number, but it is believed that the actual number is 130. These charges span nine years of alleged financial rule breaches, with the bulk - 80 charges - covering the period from 2009 to 2018 when City transformed from mid-table mediocrity into european powerhouses.
The 12-week hearing concluded in December at the International Dispute Resolution Centre near St Paul's, with both sides presenting their arguments before a three-person independent panel headed by an Arsenal supporter. The timeframe between the hearing and the judgment was always expected to take several months because of the volume of charges and the amount of information to be reviewed.
But the delays tell a different story than the Premier League's initial confidence might have suggested. Originally forecasted to reach a conclusion by early spring, the verdict now looks unlikely before the 2025/26 season gets underway for City at Molineux on 16th August. Legal experts suggest this isn't unusual given the case's scope, but it may indicate the commission is finding the evidence less clear-cut than anticipated.
From City's perspective, the delay works in their favour on multiple fronts. Every passing month allows normal football operations to continue while the legal storm clouds gather. The club has maintained its stance throughout: they have done nothing wrong and possess irrefutable evidence to prove it.
The charges themselves break down into several categories that City's legal team will have systematically dismantled. The most serious allegations centre on inflated sponsorship deals, particularly around the Etihad Stadium naming rights and other commercial arrangements with companies linked to the club's ownership. City's defence has consistently argued these deals reflect fair market value and comply with all relevant regulations.
Then there are the more procedural charges - allegations of failing to cooperate with Premier League investigations and not providing accurate financial information. These administrative breaches, while serious, carry less severe potential sanctions than the substantive financial rule violations.
The elephant in the room remains the potential punishments. Relegation has been bandied about in media speculation and is feverishly touted by supporters of the red cartel, but legal experts suggest this would be an unprecedented sanction for financial rule breaches. Points deductions, transfer restrictions, and significant fines appear more likely outcomes if any charges are proven.
However, City's confidence in their legal position appears unshaken. The club's summer transfer business suggests they expect to operate normally regardless of the outcome. The backing of the ownership group remains unwavering, and there's been no indication of financial planning for potential sanctions.
The delay also allows City to point to their cooperation with the process. Unlike some clubs who've challenged the Premier League's jurisdiction, City submitted to the hearing and presented their defence comprehensively. This may work in their favour when the commission considers any potential sanctions.
For Pep Guardiola, who said in February 2025 that he expected the outcome "in one month", the uncertainty continues. But the manager's recent contract extension suggests the club hierarchy remains confident about their legal position.
The broader context matters too. City's case comes amid wider questions about the Premier League's financial regulations and their enforcement. The independent regulator's arrival has added another layer of complexity to English football's governance, potentially influencing how this case is viewed.
As summer moves on, the footballing world waits for a verdict that could reshape the Premier League landscape. But for City, every day of delay represents another day of normal operations, another transfer window unimpeded, and another season to build their case that success on the pitch was achieved through sporting excellence rather than financial manipulation.
The commission's deliberations continue behind closed doors, but the length of their consideration may prove City's strongest defence yet. In legal terms, a quick verdict often signals clear guilt or innocence. A prolonged deliberation suggests the evidence is complex, contested, and far from the slam-dunk case that certain agenda-driven media shills would have you believe.
When the verdict finally arrives, it will define not just City's future but the entire trajectory of English football's financial regulations. Until then, the waiting game continues - and City appear increasingly comfortable with the silence.
