Man City 115 charges explained as Premier League await verdict and Liverpool watch on

Below is a summary of the full article. Click here for the full version from Echo or go back to LFC Live.

The case is unparalleled in magnitude and the tribunal's conclusion, whether they are deemed to have violated regulations or are cleared, will carry substantial implications.Claims of financial misconduct were initially reported by German publication Der Spiegel in 2018, which alleged that improper payments had occurred at the club.What are the 115 accusations?The allegations fall into three distinct categories: illicit financing, non-cooperation and breaches of financial rules within UEFA and Premier League regulations.Manchester City are accused of:54x Failure to provide accurate financial information 2009/10 to 2017/18.14x Failure to provide accurate details for player and manager payments from 2009/10 to 2017/18.5x Failure to comply with UEFA's rules including Financial Fair Play (FFP) 2013/14 to 2017/18.7x Breaching Premier League's PSR rules 2015/16 to 2017/18.35x Failure to co-operate with Premier League investigations December 2018 - February 2023.Could Man City face relegation if found guilty?Nobody can say for certain. Given the unprecedented scale of this case, the potential punishments appear limitless, with every option remaining on the table.Relegation remains a possibility - though it appears an improbable one - alongside the stripping of their titles, transfer bans, points deductions and financial penalties.Football finance expert Kieran Maguire told the Manchester Evening News in April: "We don't know if Manchester City are innocent or they'll be proven guilty of any of the charges.

There'll likely be a further wait before the tariff is announced and we find out whether it's a financial penalty or a points deduction, nuclear option which would be kicking them out of the league but I think most people think it's unlikely."It remains crucial to emphasise that City have vehemently denied any wrongdoing and insist they possess irrefutable evidence to support their position.Why has the verdict taken so long?Simply put, the sheer volume of charges and gravity of the allegations explains why proceedings have dragged on. In the case of Manchester City, you're going to have to multiply that by probably a factor of 10, so we could be looking at half a million pieces of evidence, which have to be reflected upon by the three people in the commission.Sky Sports discounted Premier League and EFL packageThis article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it.

Learn moreSky has slashed the price of its Essential TV and Sky Sports bundle for the 2025/26 season, saving members £336 and offering more than 1,400 live matches across the Premier League, EFL and more.Sky will show at least 215 live Premier League games this season, an increase of up to 100 more."They're also in demand in their own jobs so trying to get them around a table on a regular basis isn't necessarily easy and that's why eight months later we're still not really further down the road in terms of a conclusion to the evidence referral and then making a verdict."What have Man City said?Following the announcement of the charges in February 2023, City released a forcefully-worded statement rejecting all allegations and expressing they were "surprised" by the Premier League's accusations.City claim they welcome the independent commission, citing their "comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence" supporting their maintained innocence. "As such we look forward to this matter being put to rest once and for all," the statement concluded.Last September, Guardiola expressed he was "happy" that the case was commencing, whilst hinting that all other Premier League clubs desired to see City punished.What has the Premier League said?Premier League chief Richard Masters declined to reveal the start date of the hearing when questioned by a Government panel at the start of 2024, citing the private nature of the entities involved.Elaborating on his inability to provide a specific date, Masters told the BBC: "Quite simply, it's not within our rules to be able to do so."What we do is we publish charges when they are made and we publish decisions when they are made.