Manchester City say they won. The Premier League says that, actually, there is nothing to see here and that, if we all try really hard, we can just pretend that we will wake up in the morning and it will all feel like a bad dream.
And as everyone tries to decipher the competing victory statements from both sides in this fight over Associated Party Transactions (APT), as some celebrate a blow to the establishment sides they call the ‘Red Cartel’ and others hold their heads in their hands, it feels as if this was just a skirmish alongside the great battle that is already under way over City’s 115 alleged breaches of financial rules.
The wrangling over rulebooks and spending restrictions is the new normal in the English top flight and its wins and losses are greeted with the same breathless excitement as the feats of our players on Saturday and Sunday afternoons across the country.
It has become a little trite to say it now but beyond the dissection of the legal arguments and the explanations of them that were released by City and the Premier League, it really felt as if there were no winners in the judgment delivered by a legal panel and released on Monday.
City’s biggest victory was achieved in its challenge to the rule that said loans from club shareholders did not have to undergo tests to see if they were of fair market value. The arbitration panel agreed that the rules distorted competition because ‘they permit one form of subsidy… but not another.’
Man City have claimed victory over the Premier League over Associated Party Transactions
The Premier League - led by Richard Masters - claim the panel in the case have recognised the legitimacy of the APT system and had rejected many of Manchester City's challenges
The case feels like a skirmish in the battle over City’s 115 alleged breaches of financial rules
Whatever one’s view of the bigger picture here, it is hard to disagree with the legal rationale of that element of the judgment. Once again, it felt as if the Premier League had been a weak, ineffectual and, frankly, rather dim prosecutor of its case.
That victory, though, struck a blow at other clubs in the Premier League which are heavily dependent on shareholder loans and would be at risk of falling foul of profit and sustainability regulations.
So City’s victory could be a blow for many of its rivals. That is not City's problem, of course, but it is English football's problem. Just as City view Premier League victories in these matters as strikes at the heart of their existence. It is grim reading for everyone. Our clubs are engaged in an all-out civil war. Every page of this judgment made that clearer and clearer.
The Premier League took comfort, it said, from the fact that the panel recognised the legitimacy of the APT system and had rejected the majority of City’s challenges.
So those who favour a spending free-for-all in the English game, a philosophy that may bring the destruction of the football pyramid as we know it, have not yet got their way.
Clubs are engaged in an all-out civil war off the pitch, with Man City's title rivals Arsenal having been one of eight clubs to have given evidence against the Premier League champions
Perhaps they have inched a little bit closer to it, perhaps the authority of the Premier League has been diminished by another step, but Monday’s revelations do not feel like a decisive step in the battle.
The APT rules have been preserved, although quite how the Premier League remedy the anomalies over shareholder loans that City have forced to be recognised remains to be seen. It may not be quite as simple as they are claiming.
And the warring goes on, and the positions become more entrenched and the game feels a little bit bleaker, day by day.