Manchester City supporters have reacted with anger and suspicion after reports revealed that Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Tottenham were notified of the club’s guilty verdict before the rest of the Premier League.
The revelation has quickly become one of the most discussed aspects of the latest development surrounding Manchester City’s legal battle with the Premier League.
According to The Telegraph, the four clubs had previously reserved the right to seek compensation from Manchester City after being given legal notice in September 2024.
BREAKING: Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Tottenham were notified of #ManCity’s guilty verdict before the rest of the league. In September 2024, they were the four Premier League clubs that gave @ManCity legal notice of their right to seek compensation.
[via @SamWallaceTel]
— City Xtra (@City_Xtra) October 7, 2026
When supporters learned that those same four clubs were reportedly informed about the guilty verdict ahead of the other 15 Premier League clubs, questions immediately followed.
For many City fans, the issue is not simply about the verdict itself.
Instead, they are questioning why those four clubs were given information before everyone else and whether the process can genuinely be described as fair and impartial.
‘Impartial panel they say’
One of the clearest reactions came from a City supporter who wrote: “Impartial panel they say.”
That short response captured the mood running through much of the discussion.
City supporters have spent years debating the Premier League’s case against the club, but the latest revelation has shifted attention towards the handling of the verdict.
The timing is particularly significant because Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Tottenham were the four clubs that had reserved the right to pursue compensation from City.
That connection has made the early notification especially difficult for some supporters to accept.
Another fan simply asked:
“Why they getting told before anyone else?”
It is arguably the most straightforward question raised by the entire development.
If all Premier League clubs were ultimately expected to receive the verdict, supporters want to understand why four clubs with a direct financial interest in potential compensation were reportedly given the information first.
City fans question the idea of a level playing field
The reaction was not limited to accusations or jokes.
Some supporters focused on what the development could mean for the principle of competitive fairness.
One fan asked:
“And you’re telling me it’s a level playing field.”
That comment reflects a wider concern among City supporters.
For years, Manchester City fans have argued that criticism of the club should be separated from the legal process itself. The latest revelation, however, has caused some supporters to question whether the institutions involved have maintained sufficient distance from the clubs potentially affected by the outcome.
Another supporter described the situation as “Fishy.”
That reaction was echoed by another fan who said:
“I always knew something was fishy about this case, there are teams which have failed to fight and win city on the pitch now they just want us out of the league. This is all a set up.”
The wording is emotional, but it demonstrates why the latest information has struck such a nerve with parts of the City fanbase.
Supporters are not only discussing the guilty verdict. They are examining every stage of the process and asking whether rival clubs have had too much influence or too much access.
‘Fair and impartial’
Another supporter summarised their feelings with two words:
“Fair and impartial.”
The comment was clearly framed as scepticism rather than praise.
That theme appeared repeatedly throughout the reaction.
The phrase “impartial” has become particularly important because supporters believe the sequence of events creates an obvious question.
If four clubs had already reserved their right to seek compensation, why were they among the clubs informed first?
That does not automatically establish wrongdoing.
However, it does explain why supporters are demanding greater transparency.
The distinction is important.
The fact that Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Tottenham were notified before the remaining clubs does not by itself prove that the verdict was influenced by those clubs.
But for City supporters, the perception of impartiality matters.
A process can be legally structured and still face questions about how it appears to supporters and the wider football community.
‘The red cartel’ claims return
The phrase “red cartel” also appeared repeatedly in the reactions.
Several supporters used the expression to describe what they see as an alliance between powerful Premier League rivals and football authorities.
One fan wrote:
“And people say the red cartel is not real.”
Another simply responded:
“Cartel.”
While the language is strongly partisan, it reflects a long-running belief among some Manchester City supporters that the club has been treated differently because of its success and disruption of the traditional Premier League hierarchy.
The latest information has therefore reopened an old debate.
City’s supporters are asking whether clubs that have struggled to compete with Manchester City on the pitch are now benefiting from developments away from it.
That suspicion was expressed particularly strongly in the longer reaction, with the supporter arguing that some teams had failed to beat City competitively and now wanted the club removed from the league.
Again, those are supporters’ opinions rather than established facts.
But they show the level of distrust surrounding the situation.
The NDA issue has added another layer
Perhaps the most damaging detail for supporters is the reported contrast between the treatment of the four clubs and the other 15 Premier League sides.
One supporter highlighted the reported use of strict non-disclosure agreements for the other clubs while the four clubs with potential compensation claims were allegedly informed in advance.
The supporter described this as evidence of “partisan influence.”
That perception is central to the current reaction.
If the other clubs were required to sign NDAs before accessing the verdict information, supporters naturally want to know why four clubs with an existing interest in compensation were apparently given advance notification.
The question is not necessarily whether the four clubs were legally entitled to know.
It is whether the process was sufficiently transparent and consistent.
That distinction could become increasingly important as the legal battle continues.
‘This whole thing is a stitch up’
Another supporter wrote:
“This whole thing is a stitch up.”
That sentiment was repeated in different forms throughout the discussion.
Some fans used words such as “corruption”, while others described the situation as “reparations” or questioned whether the remaining 15 clubs would eventually challenge what they see as preferential treatment.
The strongest reactions should not be taken as evidence that the process was actually corrupt.
There is a difference between supporters expressing distrust and proving institutional wrongdoing.
Nevertheless, the intensity of the reaction demonstrates that confidence in the process remains extremely low among sections of the Manchester City fanbase.
Why the compensation issue matters
The compensation element makes the latest development particularly sensitive.
Manchester United, Liverpool, Arsenal and Tottenham had already notified Manchester City in September 2024 that they reserved the right to seek compensation.
That means their potential financial interest in the outcome existed long before the latest revelation.
For City supporters, the combination of those two facts is what makes the situation so controversial.
They are asking whether clubs with potential claims against City should have been among the first to receive information about the guilty verdict.
It is a question that the Premier League may ultimately have to address more clearly if it wants to avoid further speculation.
City fans want answers, not just another statement
The overall reaction from Manchester City supporters is therefore less about celebrating or rejecting the verdict and more about demanding answers.
Why were those four clubs told first?
Why were the other 15 clubs subject to strict confidentiality arrangements?
Was there a specific procedural reason for the difference?
And how does the Premier League believe that arrangement looks from the perspective of impartiality?
Those questions explain comments such as “Why they getting told before anyone else?” and “Impartial panel they say.”
For many supporters, the issue has now become one of trust.
Manchester City remain at the centre of one of the biggest legal disputes in Premier League history, and every new detail is likely to receive intense scrutiny.
The latest revelation has certainly done that.
For City fans, the most important issue is no longer simply what the verdict says.
It is whether the process surrounding that verdict can withstand scrutiny.
And judging by the reaction from supporters, many are far from convinced.
