Man City fight back with 'PROOF' government paid sponsorship deals in appeal over 115 charges

Manchester City are set to argue that the government of Abu Dhabi - not the club's owners - part-funded the "sham" sponsorship deals that contributed to them breaching Premier League financial rules.

An independent commission found that City artificially inflated their revenue by more than a staggering £900million across an eight-year period between 2009/10 and 2017/18 by using money from their parent company, Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG), to significantly increase the size of their sponsorship contracts.

As revealed in a Premier League statement, the commission reached a verdict that these were "sham" sponsorship agreements based on a number of emails that detailed how City would attempt to use money from ADUG to funnel through a sponsor - including Etihad Airways - and then to the club.

But, according to The Times, City will argue that because Etihad is owned by the Abu Dhabi government, the deal is separate from the ADUG and indeed would be allowed under Premier League rules.

After it emerged last Friday that City had lost the case on 114 of the 115 charges put against them, senior figures at the Etihad Stadium have spoken out about the findings, which has since been published in the 40-page "core decision", submitted by the independent commission.

On Saturday, City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak outlined the "irrefutable evidence" that he believes proves their innocence, including how the money was paid by the government rather than the club's owners, ADUG, and therefore would not have broken any rules.

City chief executive Ferran Soriano then went into further detail in a video statement to staff, after the Premier League published the decision from the commission on Tuesday.

"The whole Premier League case against us is based on a single false accusation - that the owner's personal money was somehow and secretly put into the club via some sponsors from Abu Dhabi," Soriano said.

"This is just not true. Irrefutable evidence has been provided to the Premier League commission that shows it could not happen and that it did not happen. This includes bank statements, money transfers, witnesses, and everything necessary to categorically demonstrate the money did not come from the owner."

Sources as provided to The Times have said this evidence involves what City claim is proof of bank transactions between the Abu Dhabi government and sponsors, rather than the ADUG and sponsors.

But the three-person commission explained the reason why they dismissed this explanation as "untrue", claiming it was "concocted well after the event in an attempt to obscure and conceal the realities of the disguised funding scheme". Now, it will be for the appeal panel to decide if they agree with the commission or City.