What do Everton and Nottingham Forest spending breach charges mean for Man City?

For the third time in the space of 12 months, the Premier League has made major spending breach charges, leaving Everton and Nottingham Forest facing season-defining sanctions. Here, Telegraph Sport dissects the key issues . . .

Why have Everton been charged twice before City’s case has been resolved?

A change in the rules in recent months has conspired against Everton. The volume of alleged wrongdoing is also significantly easier to unravel than City’s.

The Merseyside club’s two charges straddle a change in the rules which now sees the Premier League compelled to resolve alleged financial breaches within a season. Everton are immensely frustrated that the latest potential sanction includes accounts for two of three years for which they have already been punished. Given the club has been one of the lowest net spenders in the past two seasons, it’s all but certain Everton would have escaped a second charge if it was being assessed only on last year’s financial dealings.

City’s case, in contrast, benefits from an exemption in the Premier League rulebook, which says the “most exceptional cases” do not have to comply with the 12-week charge-to-resolution rule.

It is fair to question why the City case remains unsolved given Uefa initially completed its own case against the Abu Dhabi-owned club in February 2020. However, comparisons with Everton’s plight only serve to underline how complex the City case will be ahead of a landmark legal battle for the league against the mega-rich treble winners.

In contrast with the two cases against Everton which extend across a total of four years, City’s catalogue of charges covers 14 seasons from 2009-10. If proven, it would amount to the biggest scandal in English football history.

What does this mean for Manchester City?

Little, other than underlining the Premier League is upholding its Profit and Sustainability Rules (PSR) with greater rigour than ever before.

Given the competition pushed for points deductions ahead of Everton’s punishment in November, the league’s decision to charge the club again underlines City would face an unprecedented range of punishments if found guilty. Suspension, points deductions, sweeping fines and the ultimate sanction of expulsion from the league are within the potential sanctions rulebook.

City were banned for two years from European competition by Uefa in 2020 for alleged breaches of their Financial Fair Play rules but the club successfully overturned that suspension in the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas).

How different are Forest’s breaches to Everton’s?

Forest, having been promoted in 2022, are being pursued after confirming a breach of over £61million due to two years in the Championship. A total of 30 new players arrived in the season before Brennan Johnson’s £47.5 million departure, including record signing Morgan Gibbs-White from Wolves at £25 million, which increased to £30 million when the club avoided relegation.

In contrast, Everton’s transfer dealings in recent years have been relatively modest. The departure of £250,000-a-week James Rodríguez had been a major relief for the wage bill as he left the club in the autumn of 2021. Over the ensuing year, Richarlison was sold to Tottenham for around £50 million, Anthony Gordon fetched more than £40 million from Newcastle. However, Amadou Onana, Dwight McNeil and Neal Maupay arrived for multi-million pound fees and the club has faced other financial drains away from the pitch. To offset costs amid a global spending squeeze since, sanctions brought against then sponsor Alisher Usmanov in March 2022 will have proven costly last season.

Is it likely Forest will be hit with a points deduction too if found guilty?

There is only one test case in Premier League history and that is Everton’s first charge which led to a 10-point deduction in November. Given the circumstances, Everton might protest should Forest be spared such severe punishment. However, Forest have so far signalled they will cooperate as much as possible, which may play favourably with the independent panel. The club said on Monday that the club “intends to continue to cooperate fully with the Premier League on this matter and are confident of a speedy and fair resolution”.

Do either club have a strong defence?

But both Everton and Forest believe they have strong cases to fight the prospect of fresh penalties under the new fast-track punishment model. Forest will argue for dispensation to include profits from the sale of Johnson two months after the end of the period under scrutiny.  Everton, meanwhile, may have to explain complexities around repayments on loans for their stadium.

Kieran Maguire, a chartered accountant and lecturer in football finance at University of Liverpool, expects some of the arguments levelled previously by Everton to be played out again. “It does seem very harsh to sanction the club in respect of a stadium that’s not yet built and therefore gives them no advantage,” he said.