01 · THE HISAAB
Two of these four numbers are zero
Days since the charge: 1,330. Charged 6 February 2023. Three and a half years.
Decisions published: 0. The League's rule promises one.
Punishments imposed: 0. No points off, no fine.
Days to Forest's first decision: 63. Referral to four points off.
As of 28 September 2026 the League's site shows no published decision and no punishment.
Source · Premier League charge statement, site check · 28 September 2026
02 · WHAT YOU THINK HAPPENED
Guilty and punished are two different stages
What you think
You read that a panel found against City, so the punishment comes next.
What the record shows
Finding and punishing are separate stages here. The League's website carries no decision and no punishment.
No decision has been published and no punishment exists.
Source · Reported finding, checked against premierleague.com, where none is published · 28 September 2026
03 · WHAT THE CALENDAR SAYS
The league kept playing while the case ran
So the reported finding sits there with nothing attached. Meanwhile three other clubs had their cases dealt with while City's first stage stayed open.
- May 2018
City finish on 100 points. Nineteen clear of second, inside the charge window.
- 6 Feb 2023
Manchester City charged. Five categories of alleged breach, across fourteen seasons.
- 17 Nov 2023
Everton lose 10 points. £124.5m loss against a £105m limit.
- 18 Mar 2024
Forest lose 4 points. Sixty-three days after referral. Charged after City, finished long before it.
- 16 Mar 2026
Chelsea settle instead. Fines and transfer bans agreed. No points lost.
- 28 Sep 2026
City, still nothing published. No decision to read, no punishment to serve.
Two clubs were docked points and one settled while City waited.
Source · Premier League statements and Opta Analyst · 2018 to 2026
04 · TWO CLOCKS
Forest's whole case took 113 days
The calendar showed one case finished and another still open.
Forest's case, appeal included, took 113 days. City's first stage has run 1,330 days and has not stopped.
Source · Premier League statements on Forest and City · 2023 to 2026
05 · THE VOCABULARY
Four words that decide this story
arbitration. Settling a dispute before a private panel both sides accept, like a panchayat, not in a public court.
Profitability and Sustainability Rules. A cap on losses: £105m. In rupees, ₹1,333 crore. Europe's top divisions lose about 4% of revenue before tax in a year.
final award. The panel's written decision in full, the finding and the punishment together. None exists here yet.
sanction agreement. A settlement: the club admits the breach and agrees its punishment.
Source · Premier League and UEFA. Rate £1 = ₹126.94 · 27 September 2026
06 · WHAT OTHERS GOT
Everyone else's punishment has a number
Chelsea and Forest were credited with cooperation after admitting the breach. So far, the cases that ended fast were the ones the club admitted.
Everton lost ten points, reduced to six on appeal, Forest four, Everton two more. City's bar is empty because nothing has been published.
Source · Premier League statements. Rate £1 = ₹126.94 · 27 September 2026
07 · HOW FAR OVER
Rank them by overspend and one is missing
The bars ranked what each club lost. Rank the published cases by how far each went past its limit, and City is missing. Forest went furthest over, but did not lose the most points. Everton went over twice, by less than Forest each time.
Forest went £34.5m over a £61m limit, the widest gap here.
Source · Premier League statements on Everton and Forest · 2023 to 2024
08 · WHO HOLDS WHAT
Eight stages, and nobody owns the clock
The Judicial Panel picks each case's panel, called a Commission. The League promised the document itself. Its statement says: "Under Premier League Rule W.82.2, the Commission's final award will be published on the Premier League's website." That means publication is promised, but never a date.
Nobody holds the bottom row, so no party can set a date. The contested cell is publication. In 2021 City lost a Court of Appeal fight to keep a ruling unpublished.
Source · Premier League and Harvard Journal of Sports and Entertainment Law · 2022 to 2023
09 · WHAT INDIA ASKED FOR
An Indian committee asked for a standing officer
Nobody in that grid held a deadline. India's Supreme Court committee faced the same problem in cricket and asked for officers who exist before the dispute does. A smaller Indian football case, one defender's contract, was reported cleared in nine days.
The committee asked for standing officers. The Premier League convenes a panel per case.
Source · Lodha Committee report, Premier League and Scroll.in · 2015 to 2024