Remember I was first to tell you.

Manchester United haven’t been able to win the league or anything of any significance since they haven’t been able to buy it. The day they couldn’t financially bulldoze every other team in Europe was the day the roof started leaking apparently. Now it’s an even playing field they are done

Might be wise to ask your employers @SkySports not to put you on Utd commentary in the future @GNev2 ya wet wipe 🤡

Matchday competition

Win one of our retro City T-shirts

Retweet to enter

If City beat Villa today and Cherki scores first we'll give away a T-shirt to a follower who retweets

Good luck and cmon City

Can't wait? Grab yours here thegingerwigscitygifts.com/products/retro…

Everyone at Manchester City is wishing a speedy recovery to our former captain and Club legend, Vincent Kompany.

Get well soon, Vinny 🩵

🚨JUST IN: The Premier League's Key Match Incidents Panel says there was NO MISTAKE with Ryan Gravenberch’s RED CARD against Manchester City.

The panel voted 4:1 IN FAVOR of referee Chris Kavanagh's decision.

Kyle Walker on Instagram 📲🩵

RT @WeAre1894: City insist that sponsorship was done legally. The main issue. Talksport mention Mancini however not their own Ray "Party" P…

Matchday competition

Win a Cherki Tshirt

Retweet to enter

If City beat AEK tonight and Cherki scores first we'll give away a T-shirt to a follower who retweets

Good luck and cmon City

Can't wait? Grab yours here thegingerwigscitygifts.com/products/cherk…

Grim reading from Gabby Logan. Richard Keys and Andy Gray already had chequered pasts, but this is something else.

“Even years after I’d left Sky, it appeared I was still fair game for Gray and Keys,” Logan wrote in The First Half. “I sat a row behind them on a flight to ons League Final in 2005, which I was covering for ITV. I was seven months pregnant with twins, and I was huge — I looked like I’d swallowed a space hopper. In full earshot of me, and anyone who might be listening in our business-class cabin, Richard said: ‘So, Andy, what do you think of pregnant women?’”

“‘I’m afraid I don’t find them very attractive, Richard. In fact, I never slept with my wife when she was pregnant with our kids.’ ‘So you didn’t have sex, Andy?’ Keys asked. ‘No, I didn’t say that, Richard.’ Then they laughed their heads off at their little ‘comedy’ routine.”

“I was embarrassed and thought their comments were especially cruel, bearing in mind they both had children and wives of their own. Luckily, by that time I had been working with lovely men such as Ally McCoist and Andy Townsend at ITV, who were kind and caring, always asked after my wellbeing, and seemed genuinely excited for me about the babies. Keys and Gray were dinosaurs, waiting to become extinct.”

Jamie Carragher on Liverpool games

Gary Neville on Man Utd games

Alan Smith on Arsenal games

Why do Sky think we want to hear their bias nonsense while watching their unbearable teams play football?

BREAKING: Enzo Maresca has become the first manager in Premier League history to win his first seven matches in charge of a club. ✅✅✅✅✅✅✅

Seven matches. Seven wins. 😮‍💨🩵

A record-breaking @premierleague start for our boss! 🤩

What would you have them do? If, as we're told, you can't blame City players/fans, then why shouldn't they harness and lean in to avalanche of negativity for motivation? It's not odd, it's human, and classic sports mentality/behavior. Us vs. the world. You know this...I think.

There’s a glaring hypocrisy among those who have declared Manchester City guilty before the process has concluded. For them, City are already guilty. There is no verdict left to await, no evidence left to assess and no process left to respect. City must simply accept whatever punishment follows, while players (former and current) and fans are expected to adopt particular views about the owners and the club’s conduct. Everything has already been decided.

But ask those same people whether they’d accept City being cleared, including following any appeal, and the response is invariably: “OK. They got away with it.” So a guilty verdict must be respected, but an innocent one can be dismissed? They don’t want due process. They want their predetermined verdict validated.

Match Day competition and it's the Oil Club Derby

Win an Oil Club T-shirt

Retweet to enter

If City beat PSG and Cherki scores first we'll give away a T-shirt to a follower who retweets

Good luck and cmon City

Can't wait? Get your T-shirt here thegingerwigscitygifts.com/products/oil-c…

The central pillar of the Premier League's case against City is that Sheikh Mansour secretly funded substantial portions of the Club's sponsorship agreements with Abu Dhabi-owned companies, artificially inflating City's commercial revenue.

City denies this, maintaining that the financial support came from the Abu Dhabi government—the sponsoring companies' shareholder—not from City's owner. That distinction matters.

Mansour privately owns City through ADUG. The Abu Dhabi government owns the sponsoring companies. They're not legally the same entity, even though Mansour is well-connected with the government.

And it bears repeating that state-owned sponsorships are hardly unusual. For example, Arsenal's principal sponsor, Emirates Airline, is wholly owned by Dubai's government. Arsenal also received millions from Visit Rwanda. Manchester United's sponsors include state-owned Malaysia Airlines and Visit Malta.

There's nothing inherently improper about a government providing financial support to companies it owns. So if, as City insists, the sponsorship money at issue came from the Abu Dhabi government, not ADUG, the foundation of the Premier League's disguised owner-funding allegation collapses.

So did the anonymous commission get this right? What's so frustrating is that the media and punditry seem almost entirely uninterested in this question.

Instead, we get relentless calls for severe punishment before City's appeal has even been heard, based on blind faith in an anonymous Premier League panel citing undisclosed and unexplained evidence.

That's why City supporters need to keep asking the questions everyone else seems determined to ignore.

#mancity #mcfc #premierleague

Luis Enrique on #ManCity's situation: “There’s always a lot of noise around big clubs. Everyone will have to wait for the final decision from the person who’ll make the decision. We’ll wait and I hope it ends well for @ManCity because everything that was done on the field has been incredible. They deserved to win all the trophies they won..." [via @PSG_Report]

RT @KippaxWill: This two part post is not getting anything like the publicity it should.
Fantastic read 🩵

We’re talking about allegations carrying potentially devastating consequences for one of the world’s biggest football clubs. Yet the public is asked to accept the conclusions of unidentified decision-makers, reached through proceedings conducted behind closed doors, based on evidence that remains concealed.

And we’re supposed to regard this as a triumph of transparency and fairness?

Rather than wait for City—which maintains that the decision is factually and legally incorrect—to complete its appeal, the media and punditry, including former players associated with the Incumbent Four, are demanding immediate and severe punishment.

Many have spent years treating allegations as established facts. Now they treat a decision still subject to appeal as the final word.

This is a complete mockery of due process and fundamental fairness.

Even if City ultimately prevails, it will already have been punished in the court of public opinion. Years of reputational damage, attacks on the legitimacy of its accomplishments, and efforts to discredit the Club cannot simply be undone by a successful appeal.

And consider the broader picture.

A League historically dominated by a handful of established clubs adopts financial regulations that substantially favor those incumbents. Its chief executive, appointed through a process reportedly influenced by some of those same clubs, oversees an investigation into the challenger that broke their dominance. Charges arrive during that challenger’s greatest season. An anonymous commission, constituted under a disciplinary structure connected to the League, ultimately issues a guilty verdict based on evidence the public cannot examine.

Meanwhile, a partisan media and punditry demands that the Club be punished before the appeals process has run its course.

How could anyone reasonably expect City supporters not to question this process?

So, for those wondering why Manchester City supporters are sticking together, defending their Club, and refusing to accept the prevailing narrative, there’s your answer.

We’re entitled to demand transparency. We’re entitled to question whether the process has been fair. And we’re entitled to defend our Club against those who decided long ago what they wanted the outcome to be.

We will not apologize for any of that.

And we certainly won’t play the sad clowns that this deluded circus demands.

2/2

If Manchester City supporters are firing back, it’s because we refuse, as Simon Bajkowski of the Manchester Evening News so eloquently put it, to “play the sad clowns that the deluded circus demand.”

And let’s be clear: this entire legal process, together with the relentless outrage from partisan media and punditry, has become a circus that stinks to high heaven.

Before Sheikh Mansour bought Manchester City in 2008, the Cartel was firmly in control of English football. The established Incumbent Four had won 15 of 16 Premier League titles. They occupied every Champions League qualification spot for three consecutive seasons. City had won none.

Then City emerged as a genuine challenger to the established order, thanks to an owner with the resources necessary to compete with the Incumbent Four.

And suddenly, protecting football’s “financial sustainability” became the great crusade.

Shockingly, the rules that emerged—tying permissible spending to existing commercial revenue—overwhelmingly favored the Incumbent Four. The clubs that had spent decades building their financial advantages could continue spending accordingly. Challengers seeking to close the gap would face an entirely different set of constraints.

The established order had built its advantage. Now the rules would help preserve it.

In March 2019, the Premier League, with Richard Masters serving as interim CEO, opened an investigation into whether City had violated its financial rules. Masters would later become the League’s permanent CEO through an appointment process reportedly influenced by United and Liverpool.

Nearly four years later, on February 6, 2023, in the midst of what would become City’s historic treble-winning season, the Club was formally charged. The timing alone raises legitimate questions about the influence of partisan interests within the League.

The commission tasked with hearing the charges was then constituted under the authority of a Judicial Panel chair appointed through a process involving Masters and the Premier League.

And so the cloud hanging over City continued for an absurdly long time.

Finally, on September 29, 2026, we received a guilty verdict.

But that verdict came with a few rather extraordinary asterisks.

First, we don’t get to know who actually rendered the verdict. The identities of the commission members remain undisclosed.

Second, we don’t get to see the underlying evidence the commission supposedly analyzed—at least not yet.

Instead, we’re given a 40-page, heavily redacted decision setting out the commission’s findings, while the evidence underlying those findings and the supporting appendices remain outside public scrutiny.

We’re simply expected to accept on blind faith that an anonymous commission conducted its proceedings without bias, fairly evaluated the evidence, and reached conclusions fully supported by that evidence.

Perhaps it did. But how is anyone outside the proceedings supposed to make that judgment?

1/2 #mancity