Man City Owners Could Be Forced Out as Regulator Chief Refuses to Rule Out Second Investigation

Manchester City’s owners could face pressure to sell the club if the existing financial-rule verdict is upheld and England’s Independent Football Regulator concludes that intervention is necessary. Regulator chair David Kogan has confirmed that the watchdog may launch its own investigation after City’s appeal, while insisting that no decision will be made before the current process is completed.

Man City Owners Face Fresh Uncertainty Over Their Future

Manchester City’s ownership has come under renewed scrutiny after David Kogan, chair of England’s Independent Football Regulator (IFR), confirmed that the watchdog has the authority to force an owner to relinquish control of a club in certain circumstances.

Speaking on The Rest Is Football podcast, Kogan said the regulator could intervene if it concluded that those running a club had failed to meet the required standards of conduct, fairness and propriety.

His comments have intensified attention on City’s ongoing financial-rule case, which has already produced a verdict against the Premier League champions. The club has appealed that decision, meaning the final outcome remains unresolved.

Kogan’s remarks do not mean that City’s owners, including Sheikh Mansour, have been ordered to sell. Rather, they underline the potential consequences if the existing findings stand and a separate assessment by the regulator establishes grounds for action.

Regulator Confirms It Could Launch Its Own Investigation

The possibility of a second investigation is central to the latest developments.

City’s current dispute stems from proceedings brought by the Premier League over alleged financial-rule breaches. An independent commission found against the club on 114 of the 115 charges, with findings concerning commercial arrangements and financial reporting over a nine-season period.

City has challenged the verdict, arguing that it contains material errors of law, principle and fact. The club maintains its position as the appeal process continues.

Kogan said the IFR would wait for the outcome of that process before deciding whether to conduct its own investigation. He made clear that the watchdog would examine the evidence and determine whether further action was justified rather than reach a premature conclusion.

The regulator’s potential inquiry would have a different focus from the Premier League case. While the league can pursue sporting sanctions against a club, the IFR is concerned with the suitability and conduct of owners, directors and senior executives.

Why the Regulator Could Force an Owner to Sell

Kogan was emphatic when discussing the regulator’s authority to require an owner to step away from a club.

He said the IFR could act if it believed an owner was running a club in a way that was not “fit, fair or done with propriety”. Asked whether an owner could simply refuse to comply, he said the regulator had “absolute power” to enforce such a decision.

The comments highlight the significance of the IFR’s ownership and governance responsibilities. Its remit is not limited to whether a club can pay its bills or remain financially sustainable; it also includes scrutiny of the individuals who exercise control.

However, the existence of that power does not establish that it will be used against Manchester City. Any intervention would depend on the regulator’s assessment of the evidence, the applicable standards and the circumstances of the case.

The current appeal remains a crucial step before the IFR decides whether further examination is necessary.

Financial Findings Keep Pressure on Manchester City

The underlying case concerns alleged breaches of Premier League financial rules, including commercial arrangements that the independent commission found had been used to inflate revenues or reduce costs by more than £900 million over nine seasons.

The commission also found that City had made concerted efforts to obstruct the league’s investigation. The club disputes the verdict and has pursued an appeal, so the findings remain subject to that legal process.

The scale and duration of the allegations have made the case one of the most consequential governance disputes in English football. Any eventual sanctions could affect the club beyond its immediate sporting performance, depending on the decisions made by the relevant authorities.

The IFR’s possible involvement introduces another dimension: instead of concentrating on points deductions, fines or other club-level penalties, it could examine whether the people controlling City satisfy the required ownership standards.

That distinction means the ownership question cannot be answered solely by predicting the outcome of the Premier League proceedings.

Political Independence Becomes Another Major Issue

The case has also attracted attention because of its potential implications for relations between the United Kingdom and the United Arab Emirates, where City’s ownership is based.

Concerns have been raised about whether political or diplomatic considerations could influence the handling of the matter. Kogan has previously said he would resign if political interference affected an investigation into the club.

The regulator’s independence is important because its decisions could have major consequences for one of English football’s most prominent clubs and its owners.

Kogan has stressed that the IFR must assess the evidence rather than allow outside pressure to determine its conclusions. He has also cautioned against making judgments before the appeal has been resolved.

For City, the issue is therefore not only the outcome of the existing financial case but also whether a separate regulatory process will follow.

What Happens Next for City and Sheikh Mansour?

The immediate priority remains the appeal against the independent commission’s verdict. Once that process has concluded, the IFR will be able to consider whether it should open its own investigation and what, if any, action might be appropriate.

A forced sale is one of the regulator’s possible powers, but it is not an automatic consequence of the current ruling. Any such move would require the regulator to reach its own conclusion under the relevant ownership and conduct standards.

Manchester City’s ownership is therefore not facing an immediate, confirmed removal. Instead, the club is confronting a period of uncertainty in which the appeal outcome could influence whether a second regulatory examination takes place.

The next decisions will determine whether the controversy remains centred on financial-rule sanctions or develops into a wider challenge to the club’s ownership structure. Until the appeal is resolved and the regulator reaches its own assessment, the prospect of Sheikh Mansour being forced to sell remains a possibility rather than a settled outcome.