Burnham vows to resist potential talks with UAE government over Man City verdict appeal

Prime Minister Andy Burnham has stated that it would be incorrect to "leap to judgment" over Manchester City , expressing confidence that his past interactions with the club will hold up under examination. Addressing the team's conviction over financial regulation violations spanning from 2009-10 to 2017-18, he argued they ought to be permitted to "contest the situation if they don’t think it’s fair". However, Burnham maintained he would "keep my distance" if representatives from the United Arab Emirates government approached him regarding the conflict after City vowed to appeal. According to the Premier League, an independent panel concluded that City setup "sham" commercial agreements with several sponsors throughout that timeframe as part of a covert funding system, in which the firms only covered a fraction of the agreed sponsorship costs. It was established by the panel that the outstanding amounts were provided by the club's parent entity, Abu Dhabi United Group Investment & Development Ltd (ADUG). Man City chiefs have denied any wrongdoing (Reuters) Expressing gratitude to City Football Group - the parent organisation of the club - for its investment in the local area, the Prime Minister noted he would be "really concerned to lose them" if they chose to divest. Speaking to 5 News , he remarked: "I think it’s only right that Manchester City and Manchester City supporters have that opportunity to continue to contest the situation if they don’t think it’s fair." Previously, the Prime Minister spoke out against the Premier League's penalty docking points from Everton for financial rule infractions. The Merseyside club successfully appealed their initial 10-point sanction in 2024, seeing it lowered to six points. Burnham, a fan of Everton, informed the news outlet: "I think it’s only right to say that it is still contested now. "The Premier League proclaimed (Everton) guilty and I never accepted that and therefore it would be somewhat wrong of me to leap to judgment on another football club. But they’re very serious charges, don’t get me wrong." He added: "But I think it’s only fair from my own experience fighting for my club that I take that position at this stage." When questioned by the BBC on whether his historical interactions with Manchester City would survive public scrutiny, he replied: "Oh indeed, I do actually thank the City Football Group and the wider ownership for the money that they didn’t just put into the Etihad and the campus around it but also into the city, but yes of course." In response to queries about a potential sale of the team, he stated: "I would be really concerned to lose them. They’ve been such a huge partner in the building of modern Manchester. "Obviously, the building of Manchester City into the global force that it is." On whether he would entertain dialogue with the UAE government concerning the ongoing case, he explained to the BBC: "I am not getting directly involved in the process. I’ve not spoken to anybody directly about that. Burnham would not be drawn on whether City should be relegated after years of dominance (Getty) "I have to keep my distance from it. It would be wrong for me to do anything else. It’s an independent legal process that has to play its course through. "…There’s a lot at stake. Let’s be honest about that, for the football club, for city supporters, for the city of Manchester." The Prime Minister declined to comment on whether Manchester City ought to face relegation from the top flight. For its part, the club plans to challenge the ruling "on the basis that the opinion contains clear material errors, of law, principle and fact, and is unsafe". Following the confirmation of the breaches, the Premier League indicated that potential penalties will be considered at a subsequent hearing held by the independent panel. A public statement from the Premier League added that additional "sham arrangements" allowed the club to report artificially suppressed operating costs. Over the period in question, the illicit scheme served to boost recorded income and trim expenditure by in excess of £900 million. In its final judgment, the panel declared: "By its conduct the club clearly intended to circumvent the Premier League rules."