Skip to content
Sign in
Sports · Global

Kogan says regulator can require Manchester City owners to leave

Kogan said a regulator could have the power to require football club owners to leave, describing a potential enforcement measure without linking it to a named club or case.

AI-assisted synthesis · Based on 4 independent reports from 5 outlets · Article text read from 2 of 4 reportsHow it's made

View timeline · 10 entries
5 outlets3 regionsLatest reporting 4 min read
Coverage: MixedL 1 · C 3 · R 1
Updat3 graphic: Manchester City
Updat3 graphic

What happened

Key facts

  • David Kogan said a football regulator could require Manchester City’s owners to leave.
  • The Premier League announced on February 6, 2023, that it had referred Manchester City to an independent commission.
  • The Premier League’s allegations concerned rule breaches from 2009 to 2018, including failures to provide accurate financial information and cooperate with its investigation.
  • The independent commission later found Manchester City guilty of breaches.
  • Manchester City challenged the commission’s findings, and its appeal was pending when Kogan discussed the regulator’s potential powers.
  • The regulatory framework was established by the Football Governance Act 2025.

The brief

Independent Football Regulator chair David Kogan says the regulator has the power to require Manchester City’s owners to sell or step away if it concludes they ran the club improperly.

The comments concern a possible consequence for the club’s ownership, but no action has been announced: Manchester City has appealed the commission’s findings, and Kogan said it was premature to discuss what the regulator might do. An independent commission found Manchester City guilty of breaching Premier League rules.

GB News reports that the commission upheld 114 of 115 charges. ESPN describes the commission’s findings as involving commercial arrangements that it judged to be sham arrangements, used to increase revenues or reduce costs by more than £900 million over nine seasons. The reported financial period runs from the 2009-10 season through 2017-18.

GB News says the allegation concerned revenue being inflated by £900 million; ESPN gives the commission’s finding as more than £900 million in revenue inflation or cost reduction. Those descriptions differ in scope: ESPN includes reduced costs as well as increased revenues, while GB News describes the figure as revenue inflation.

Manchester City has appealed the original commission verdict. The club’s stated position, as reported by GB News, is that the opinion contains material errors of law, principle and fact and is unsafe. That appeal means the commission’s findings are contested by the club; the sources do not report an appeal decision.

Kogan described the regulator’s authority in terms of ownership and conduct. ESPN quotes him saying the IFR could ask an owner to step away if it considers the owner’s management of a club unfit, unfair or lacking propriety. GB News reports that Kogan referred to tests for owners, senior directors and executives.

The accounts therefore describe a potential ownership measure tied to the regulator’s assessment, rather than a decision already made about Manchester City. The coverage frames the possible outcome with different emphasis.

The Guardian’s headline links a possible Manchester City sale to the verdict being upheld, while Reuters and CNA’s headlines present Kogan’s statement as a general power to make club owners sell. ESPN likewise describes the possibility as conditional on a finding that the owners ran the club improperly.

Across those accounts, the appeal and the regulator’s lack of an announced action remain central to the status of any potential sale.

Why it matters

  • If used, the power could force an owner to give up control, leaving the affected club to find new ownership and potentially disrupting investment and long-term planning. Kogan did not say Manchester City’s owners—or any named owner—were at risk of such an order.

What to watch next

  • Whether Manchester City’s appeal changes the status of the independent commission’s findings.
  • Whether the Independent Football Regulator assesses the club’s owners, senior directors or executives under its ownership and conduct tests.
  • Whether Kogan or the regulator announces any action after the appeal process.

How it's being covered

Coverage analysisShow details
5 source articles · 5 unique outlets · 4 distinct reports
Outlet political mix: Mixed· 1 Left · 3 Center · 1 Right
Where the outlets are based: Europe 40% · US/Canada 20% · Other 40%
Outlet political mix
Mixed
Left
Center
Right
1 outlet
3 outlets
1 outlet
The marker shows coverage balance: each unique outlet counts once.
Geography
Where the outlets covering this story are based.
5 unique outletsDominant coverage: Europe
How we measure coverage

One source is from a wire service (AP, Reuters, AFP or Bloomberg), whose reporting other outlets often republish.

How outlets' accounts compare

5 framing differences · 1 uncorroborated claim · 2 information gaps
The reports repeat the same account with different emphasis; its central claims are not independently confirmed in the reporting Updat3 read.Compared across 2 reports whose article text Updat3 read; 2 other outlets were checked by headline only.
Framing / emphasis differences
Sources emphasise different angles, actors or consequences of the same reporting.
  • The Guardian headline makes a Manchester City sale conditional on the verdict being upheld; Reuters and CNA headlines emphasize the regulator’s general power to require club owners to sell.
  • ESPN describes the possible action as a requirement to sell or step away if the owners are found to have run the club improperly; GB News emphasizes the regulator’s power and its tests for owners and senior executives.
  • GB News reports 114 of 115 charges were upheld; ESPN describes the commission’s rule-breach finding without giving a charge count.
  • ESPN attributes to the commission findings about sham commercial arrangements that increased revenues or reduced costs; GB News describes the allegation as revenue inflation.
  • Manchester City disputes the commission’s opinion and says its appeal identifies material errors of law, principle and fact.
Updat3: These are differences of emphasis, not disputes about what is reported. They do not show that the reported claims are true.
One-sided or uncorroborated claims
Claims that come from one party or one source family and are not independently corroborated.
  • Kogan said the regulator had “absolute power” to require an owner to sell or step away, while describing any action against Manchester City as premature during the appeal.
Updat3: Not independently corroborated yet — treat as a claim, not an established fact.
Not established by the reporting
Information the available reporting does not contain or confirm. This is a gap, not a disagreement.
  • The sources do not give a date or expected timetable for a decision on Manchester City’s appeal.
  • The sources do not report that the Independent Football Regulator has opened a specific assessment of Manchester City’s owners or announced action against them.
Updat3: Updat3 cannot conclude anything about this from the current sources.

Timeline

Developments from this story's sources, dated background we compiled and fact-checked, and our earlier coverage. Each row says which.
  1. St Mark’s (West Gorton) was formed, the club that became Manchester City.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  2. Abu Dhabi United Group acquired Manchester City.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  3. The English Football League expelled Bury after a proposed takeover failed to provide the required assurances.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  4. The review was commissioned in November 2020 after repeated financial problems at clubs and concern that supporters had little influence over decisions affecting their teams.
    Background · from our historical context
  5. In April 2021, six Premier League clubs—Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Manchester City, Manchester United and Tottenham Hotspur—joined plans for a European Super League.
    Background · from our historical context
  6. Its final report, published on 24 November 2021, recommended an independent regulator, stronger checks on owners and directors, and safeguards for clubs’ identities and heritage.
    Background · from our historical context
  7. The government accepted the central recommendation of the football governance review.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  8. The Premier League charged Manchester City with 115 alleged breaches of its financial rules.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  9. The government introduced the Football Governance Bill.
    Background · compiled and fact-checked by Updat3
  10. Parliament provided the statutory framework through the Football Governance Act 2025, which received Royal Assent on 21 July 2025.
    Background · from our historical context

How we got here

The immediate context was the creation of an independent regulator for English football. David Kogan was discussing the regulator’s potential enforcement powers, not announcing a decision about Manchester City or identifying an owner subject to an order.

The distinction matters: the measure he described would be a possible tool for dealing with ownership, rather than a finding that a particular person had failed a test or had to leave a club. Parliament provided the statutory framework through the Football Governance Act 2025, which received Royal Assent on 21 July 2025.

Original sources

1 of 5 articles · Asia · Show all

Every story links to the reporting it was built from. How we choose sources

Spotted a factual error, a broken link or a misleading summary? Tell us.