Manchester City’s former financial adviser, Stefan Borson, has told Football Insider: “The nub of it will be whether anybody can establish that the breaches created a sporting advantage. If you have a sporting advantage established, then it’s likely that you end up with a sporting penalty. Now, that can be mitigated by considerations like new ownership, early guilty plea, lots of cooperation. These are all things that Chelsea are pushing out into the media as being what they’ve done. That is mitigation. There’s no question. The question is what’s the starting point?
“Is the starting point, well, this is very serious, and we think you’ve had a major sporting advantage? The starting point is a number of points, in which case you’re mitigating down percentage wise from that points deduction.
“If you look at something like Nottingham Forest, they had a lot of cooperation commended by the commission. Now, that was a Premier League commission, but the law is basically the same and they’ll cross compare the cases. In that case, there was basically an argument where Nottingham Forest said, we should have a 50 per cent reduction on the penalty. The Premier League said, that feels a bit too much 50 per cent, maybe 30 per cent. The commission went in the end for 30 per cent. It was going to be six for Nottingham Forest and they got two knocked off for early admission and cooperation.
“You would think that Chelsea would be able to get 30 per cent, maybe even a 40 per cent reduction for their mitigation, adding all the bits and pieces together if everything they’re saying is true about how they cooperated, admitted it, informed. So, they get very good mitigation.”