Manchester City manager Enzo Maresca has defended his players’ celebrations after their 3-0 win over Liverpool at Anfield on 11 October, insisting their focus remains on winning matches.
The victory was City’s first game since an independent Premier League commission found the club guilty of serious financial-rule breaches. City have appealed against the findings and continue to deny wrongdoing.
Manchester City’s players celebrated with their travelling supporters after the final whistle, drawing criticism on social media.
Speaking ahead of their Champions League match against Paris Saint-Germain on 14 October, Maresca challenged those who questioned their reaction to the win.
How Gravenberch's Red Card Changed the Anfield Match
Liverpool held City to a goalless draw until Ryan Gravenberch was sent off in the 62nd minute after fouling Jérémy Doku and receiving a second yellow card. City took advantage of the extra man, scoring three times in the final 28 minutes.
Erling Haaland put City ahead in the 65th minute after Jérémy Doku’s work in the penalty area. Doku doubled the lead three minutes later with a curling long-range strike, and Rayan Cherki sealed the 3-0 win in the 78th minute.
The result gave City six wins from six Premier League matches and left them top of the table on 18 points, three ahead of Arsenal.
City faced a hostile reception before kick-off. Liverpool fans lined the streets as the teams arrived, while stalls outside Anfield sold flags and scarves bearing the words “guilty” and “cheats” in reference to City’s financial case.
What Maresca and Dias Said About the Celebrations
Asked about the criticism, Maresca said: “Criticised for what? We won 0-3 at Anfield. What do you want us to do?” He said City had already turned their attention to the next match and stressed how difficult it is to win at Anfield.
“I am here today; the players are here today to win tomorrow. We work every day to win games,” Maresca said. “The rest is just things from outside that we need to deal with. We were so, so happy from inside the pitch and the dressing room.”
Maresca said the financial case was serious, but its outcome was beyond his control.
“We know how serious the situation is,” Maresca said. “It is not something we can do something about. Where we can do something is inside the pitch.”
He added that he does not “stress about things I don’t control” and that the message to the squad would stay the same. Maresca said City’s supporters had probably faced more difficulty than the players and staff because rival fans taunt them over the financial case.
Captain Rúben Dias backed his manager. “I very much stand by the manager’s words. It’s a win at Anfield,” he said. “In whatever circumstance, be it early in the season or late in the season, we will enjoy it just as much and celebrate however we feel in the moment.”
Dias said the players discussed the commission’s findings when they returned from international duty, helping the squad agree on how to handle the situation.
Where Man City's Appeal and Sanctions Process Stands
Manchester City appealed on 1 October, arguing that the commission’s findings contained material errors of law, principle and fact. The club said “a comprehensive body of irrefutable evidence exists” to support its position.
Under the Premier League’s new fast-track rules, the appeal hearing should take place within 12 weeks of filing, with a decision due within 30 days of its conclusion.
The 12-week deadline falls around 24 December. An independent three-member appeal board will hear the case. Some legal commentators expect City to challenge the rules’ application because the club was charged in 2023, before they were introduced.
The commission has not announced any sanctions. It remains unclear whether penalties will be decided before the appeal or take effect immediately if imposed. City would have a separate right to appeal against any sanctions.
A Bloomberg report published on 9 October said Manchester City held preliminary settlement talks with the Premier League before the commission issued its verdict, but the discussions broke down.
Bloomberg reported that a proposed deal would have involved a substantial financial payment rather than relegation or the stripping of titles.
Given the scale of the Premier League’s case, a settlement would likely have addressed only part of the dispute. Arsenal and Liverpool were also expected to oppose such an agreement.
