The City scandal is shaking the world of soccer to its core
The Manchester City case is no longer just about the club itself. It concerns the very model upon which modern European soccer was built. The Premier League’s independent commission found City guilty of 114 of the 115 violations referred for review, with the case involving, among other things, the provision of inaccurate financial data and violations of financial sustainability rules. The decision does not yet mark the end of the process, as an appeal by the Citizens is expected. However, this development does something very important: it turns the spotlight on the entire world of soccer.
Because City is not the only major club to have faced violations of financial regulations. UEFA has punished or placed top clubs under strict supervision. Juventus was banned from European competitions for the 2023–24 season and fined 20 million euros, for violations of the regulatory framework and its settlement agreement. Chelsea agreed to pay a fine of 10 million euros after submitting incomplete financial data regarding historical transactions from its previous ownership.
ΣΧΕΤΙΚΑ ΑΡΘΡΑ
The list goes on. Paris Saint-Germain, Inter, Roma, Milan, Monaco, Besiktas, and other clubs have been subject to settlement agreements and financial oversight. In the 2022 settlements alone, UEFA announced total financial contributions of 172 million euros. And it’s not just UEFA. In England, Everton was initially docked 10 points for violating the Profitability and Sustainability Rules, a penalty that was reduced to six points following an appeal. Nottingham Forest was penalized with a four-point deduction after admitting to exceeding the relevant threshold by 34.5 million pounds. So the problem is real and not limited to just one team.
The truly difficult question, however, lies elsewhere: what is the money flowing into soccer, and what does it buy? Soccer has long since ceased to be merely a sports product. It is television rights, advertising, tourism, real estate, investments, national visibility, geopolitical influence, and soft power. A soccer club can function as a commercial enterprise, as an international brand, but also as a tool for promoting a country or a powerful economic center. And here lies an even more uncomfortable reality: it is not only the teams that depend on their all-powerful owners. To a certain extent, entire nations depend on them as well.
The relationship between Britain and the United Arab Emirates is a prime example. It is no coincidence that the British government itself has publicly linked Abu Dhabi’s investment in Manchester City to the broader economic relationship with Manchester. But this points to something deeper: when soccer is linked to state-backed capital from countries that are major investment and strategic partners, a club’s fate is no longer entirely isolated from the international economy and politics. And this is where the concept of “sportswashing” comes in: the use of sports to improve the international image of a country, organization, or economic actor. It is not, in and of itself, a criminal offense. However, it is a phenomenon that must be discussed openly.
Soccer also has its own dark history of corruption. The U.S. authorities’ investigation into FIFA led to charges against more than 50 individuals and companies from more than 20 countries, with cases involving bribes and kickbacks for television and commercial rights. So we’re not talking about conspiracy theories here. We’re talking about cases that made it to the courtrooms. And at the level of FIFA itself, the era of Sepp Blatter left behind a massive institutional trauma. In 2021, FIFA’s Ethics Committee imposed multi-year bans and fines on Blatter and former Secretary General Jérôme Valcke for violations of the Code of Ethics, including issues related to bonuses, contracts, conflicts of interest, and abuse of office.
Today, under Gianni Infantino, FIFA is financially much stronger, but questions about governance have not disappeared. Power has become concentrated in organizations that manage billions and have enormous geopolitical reach. That is why transparency cannot apply only to clubs. It must also apply to the federations themselves. And this is perhaps the biggest problem in modern soccer: the rules exist, but their enforcement must be completely independent, transparent, and the same for everyone.
It is not enough to simply fine a club. If a team gains a competitive advantage over the course of a decade and the audit process is not completed until many years later, the penalty loses some of its deterrent effect.There is a need for independent European financial oversight, mandatory full disclosure of clubs’ actual ownership, scrutiny of affiliated companies and sponsors, transparency in the valuation of commercial agreements, and real sanctions that also affect match results when a serious violation is proven. And above all, one rule must apply to everyone: no name, no league, and no amount of money can be above scrutiny. Because financial fair play was not created to prevent the wealthy from investing. It was created to ensure that wealth cannot be turned into an unchecked competitive advantage.
Manchester City, Juventus, Paris Saint-Germain, AC Milan, Everton, Nottingham Forest, and so many other cases show that the problem is not isolated. It is systemic. And when soccer becomes a showcase for massive capital, the question can’t just be “how much money was spent?” The real question is: Where did it come from? Who controls it? Who benefits? And who controls those who control the game? If soccer fails to provide convincing answers to these questions, it risks losing the public’s trust. This applies in full to Cyprus as well—and those who understand will understand…
