I’ll be honest, I found parts of Sky Sports’ coverage of Liverpool’s defeat to Manchester City embarrassing.
Yes, City won 3-0 at Anfield. Yes, they took advantage after Ryan Gravenberch was sent off. And yes, Rayan Cherki and Jérémy Doku produced moments of real quality.
Nobody is denying any of that.
But there was something that really bothered me watching the coverage.
Manchester City had just been found guilty of 114 of the 115 alleged breaches in the Premier League’s financial case, yet the conversation kept returning to how brilliant they were.
Where was the same energy for the clubs and supporters who believe they were denied a fair chance to compete?
Where was the outrage about the consequences of the commission’s findings?
And why did it sometimes feel as though the football was being used to move the story along, rather than keeping the financial scandal firmly in view?
Yes, City played well. That isn’t the point.
Let me get this out of the way first.
Manchester City were excellent after Gravenberch was sent off. They scored three times, with Erling Haaland opening the scoring before Doku and Cherki added two more.
Liverpool were poor after going down to ten men, and we have to accept that.
But this wasn’t an ordinary visit to Anfield.
This was City’s first match since an independent commission found them guilty of serious financial rule breaches spanning several seasons. The club has appealed the verdict and continues to deny wrongdoing.
That context matters.
Liverpool supporters have spent years watching their club compete against City in title races that were decided by tiny margins. Those seasons involved extraordinary football, but they also involved the question of whether every club was competing under the same rules.
So when City arrived at Anfield, this was never going to be just another match.
The banners, the chants and the atmosphere reflected the anger of supporters who feel the integrity of those competitions has been damaged.
And yet, once the football took over, I felt that the wider issue was in danger of being pushed aside.
Neville and Carragher were happy to discuss City’s quality
What frustrated me most was the praise being directed at City’s players and their performance.
Gary Neville and Jamie Carragher were part of the Sky coverage, with plenty to discuss after City’s victory. Carragher praised Cherki’s quality while criticising Jeremie Frimpong, and the discussion inevitably turned towards City’s football.
To be fair, pundits are there to analyse the match. They cannot ignore good football simply because a club is involved in a major controversy.
And Carragher himself has been outspoken about what he believes should happen if City’s guilty verdict is upheld. He has argued that titles won during the period in question should be stripped.
So my complaint isn’t that nobody mentioned the case.
It’s that I wanted the coverage to keep the bigger picture in perspective.
City’s footballing ability and the financial findings are two separate issues. One doesn’t cancel out the other.
You can acknowledge a brilliant goal without forgetting the circumstances surrounding the club that scored it.
That distinction seemed to get lost in the excitement at times.
The word “cheating” isn’t coming from nowhere
Liverpool supporters were never going to welcome City warmly after these findings.
The commission’s verdict has given supporters even more reason to question the fairness of the competition during the period under investigation. The Premier League’s case included findings concerning commercial arrangements and the reporting of financial information. City have appealed, so the process is not over.
I understand why Liverpool fans use the word “cheats”. They feel their club and others were forced to compete against a team that the commission found had broken financial rules.
But the next stage matters. The appeal must be resolved, and the appropriate sanctions still have to be determined.
That doesn’t mean supporters should stay quiet.
It means the questions should keep being asked until there is a proper conclusion.
And it certainly doesn’t mean we should pretend this is just another football story.
City’s players aren’t the whole story
I also think there is a difference between criticising Manchester City’s players and questioning the people responsible for the club’s conduct.
The players who took to the pitch at Anfield didn’t decide the financial arrangements under investigation. They went out to win a football match, and they did that.
But that doesn’t make the wider issue irrelevant.
City can be a brilliantly coached team. Their players can be technically outstanding. Their manager can make excellent substitutions.
None of those things answers the questions raised by the commission’s findings.
And none of them should be used to distract from the need for a fair and credible conclusion to the case.
That’s what I wanted to hear more about.
Not endless repetition of the controversy, but a clear reminder that winning on the pitch and complying with the rules are two different things.
Liverpool have every right to be angry
The result itself was bad enough.
Liverpool were still in the contest at 0-0 when Gravenberch was sent off in the 62nd minute. Neville described the first booking as harsh, while Carragher called it a shocking decision. City scored shortly afterwards and went on to win 3-0.
That is frustrating in its own right.
But for Liverpool supporters, the match carried a much bigger emotional weight.
The club has come so close to City in several Premier League title races. Supporters remember the 97-point season in 2018/19 and the 92-point campaign in 2021/22. Those memories aren’t erased by one result, but the commission’s findings have inevitably reopened old wounds.
So, yes, I wanted Liverpool to beat City.
I wanted the players to give the supporters something to celebrate.
And I wanted the occasion to be a reminder that the footballing authorities must protect the integrity of the competition.
Instead, Liverpool lost 3-0, and the post-match conversation quickly became dominated by City’s quality and their response to the hostility.
That is what left me frustrated.
Sky Sports should be able to do both
This is not a demand for pundits to ignore what happened in the match.
It is a demand for better balance.
Praise Cherki’s goal. Discuss Doku’s impact. Analyse Maresca’s substitutions. Explain why Liverpool struggled after the red card.
But also remember why this match was so different from an ordinary Premier League fixture.
The commission’s findings deserve serious attention. The appeal deserves proper scrutiny. And supporters who believe their club was harmed by financial rule-breaking deserve to know that the issue won’t simply fade away once City score a few brilliant goals.
Footballing excellence should never be treated as a substitute for accountability.
Manchester City may have deserved their victory at Anfield. That doesn’t settle the financial case, and it doesn’t answer the questions that remain.
As a Liverpool supporter, I can accept defeat when the opposition plays better.
What I won’t accept is the idea that because City can produce a wonderful performance, the rest of the story no longer matters.
And that’s why I found parts of today’s coverage so frustrating.
The football mattered.
The result mattered.
But the wider issue mattered too.
Don’t let the brilliance on the pitch become an excuse to forget the questions that still need answering.
By Jamie (The Kopite View)
### _Related_