Report: Mourinho Sparks Debate on Man City’s Title Fate | OneFootball

What Mourinho’s Comments Highlight in Manchester City’s Case

Jose Mourinho, ever the provocateur, reignited debate with his comments regarding Manchester City’s potential points deduction. Known for his cheeky side, he suggested that if Manchester City’s titles were reallocated, he should be awarded the 2017-18 Premier League title along with any financial rewards that might accompany it. His statement is audacious, yes, but it has struck a chord as Manchester City faces over 115 Premier League charges that could lead to significant, potentially historical, consequences for English football.

Photo: IMAGO

A Legal Labyrinth: Financial and Competitive Fairness

Manchester City’s alleged breaches, spanning nine years from 2009 to 2018, form a saga that could shift the landscape of the Premier League. These accusations, if proven, suggest that City gained a financial edge over their rivals, enabling them to build a team that dominated English football, claiming titles in 2011-12, 2013-14, and 2017-18. The Athletic has covered these developments extensively, shedding light on the legal process and possible outcomes, ranging from fines to an unprecedented expulsion from the league.

The commission responsible for determining City’s fate has broad powers, which could theoretically lead to the retroactive deduction of points, a sanction rarely seen in English football. As sports lawyer Dan Chapman notes, “The commission could technically say, ‘In this particular season, we’re going to deduct you x points,’ but I’d think it extremely unlikely. I can’t think of any precedent for it.” The task is monumental — should the decision punish City in a forward-looking manner, or dare to rewrite history by retroactively adjusting past outcomes?

The Ripple Effect: Could United, Liverpool, and Others Benefit?

If City were to lose these titles, it raises an obvious question: who stands to gain? Mourinho was quick to position himself and Manchester United as beneficiaries, given their runner-up status in two of the implicated seasons. This argument becomes even more pertinent if we consider Liverpool’s second-place finish in 2013-14. But the legal implications of stripping titles and reallocating them present complex hurdles.

In theory, these clubs could be “awarded” City’s former glory, but this prospect is far from simple. Chapman points out that reallocating titles could have unforeseen consequences, not just for clubs but for individuals like Mourinho, who joked, “Then they have to pay me the bonus and give me the medal.” Indeed, if titles are retroactively granted to runners-up, clubs may face demands for financial rewards. City’s players might then also have to relinquish their medals or bonuses, a requirement that would undoubtedly be contentious.

Lawyer Chris Allen, another voice in the conversation, emphasizes the challenges of imposing retrospective penalties: “If retrospective action is to be imposed, it could give rise to other difficult questions, including: do you strip the title (unedifying for whoever was in second place) or reallocate it (an empty win)?”

Challenges in Rewriting Football’s History Books

Sport has long been resistant to altering outcomes from past seasons, preferring instead to enforce forward-facing sanctions. While sports like athletics occasionally reallocate medals, team sports with vast historical and financial implications struggle to find a fair method of rectifying past infringements. English football has had its share of retrospective sanctions; for example, Everton and Nottingham Forest faced points deductions for breaching financial rules, but these only impacted future standings, not past titles.

Furthermore, legal frameworks are generally adverse to retrospective sanctions, as Allen explains, “Sport is all about the here and now — it is the on-field competition itself that matters. The result from yesteryear should not be artificially changed after the event, otherwise, you are in danger of undermining the sporting integrity and the engagement and trust of fans in the sport itself.”

Italy’s Calciopoli scandal offers a cautionary tale. In 2006, Juventus were stripped of two Serie A titles due to match-fixing allegations but only one was reallocated, leaving an empty void in the league’s records. The Premier League might face a similar predicament: to strip or to reallocate? And if they reallocate, would the recipients consider it a true victory?

Retrospective Punishments: Are They Ever Worth It?

As Mourinho’s quip implies, legal uncertainty could prompt claims for financial compensation, not just from former managers but also from players and staff who were affected by City’s dominance. Relegated clubs from those seasons, for instance, could argue that City’s points should have placed them above the drop zone, impacting their subsequent revenue and performance.

Chapman further articulates this point: “You might find, for example, there was a club relegated and if you reallocated the points, they wouldn’t have been. Then all the players and staff might turn around and bring claims against that club asking for a bonus for staying up. It can go to illogical extremes.”

The Premier League will want to avoid a scenario where one legal verdict leads to an avalanche of additional cases from clubs, managers, and players. Any ruling must bring finality, allowing the league and its stakeholders to move forward without the shadow of past grievances.

Lessons from Other Sports: Reputational Damage and Consequences

The cycling world endured similar turmoil following Lance Armstrong’s doping scandal, where his seven Tour de France titles were rescinded but left vacant. In the case of rugby union’s Saracens, breaches of the salary cap saw the club relegated, but the option to strip past titles was deemed impossible due to regulatory limitations. Football, similarly, faces a reputational dilemma in pursuing retrospective actions. As Chris Allen contends, “If retrospective action is to be imposed, it could give rise to other difficult questions, including: do you strip the title (unedifying for whoever was in second place) or reallocate it (an empty win)?”

In these examples, governing bodies have often opted for punitive actions that prevent future breaches rather than attempting to rectify past achievements. The Premier League may ultimately favour a similar approach to avoid stirring up further controversies.

Our View – EPL Index Analysis

This ongoing investigation feels like a prolonged cloud over the club’s hard-won achievements. If City were to be stripped of their titles, the decision would surely leave fans feeling as though years of unforgettable moments — Aguero’s title-winning goal in 2011-12, the relentless drive of 2017-18 — had been erased. Such a ruling could even prompt questions about the credibility of the league as a whole: should fans remain invested if titles can be retroactively stripped due to alleged financial improprieties?

For concerned fans, it also raises anxiety about the team’s future trajectory. Should the commission impose a heavy penalty, would the club’s current standing and recruitment abilities suffer? As one fan remarked, “It’s not just about trophies, it’s about what this could mean for the future of the club.” This concern is shared by fans who fear the impact on players’ morale and potential disruption to Pep Guardiola’s plans, especially with rivals eyeing any vulnerability. Above all, Manchester City supporters hope that, whatever the decision, the ruling preserves both the integrity of their club and the Premier League itself.