Why Liverpool and Man City's defining Premier League rivalry does not need rewriting

It had seemed a triumphant farewell forPep Guardiolaat the place whichbecame his personal house of horrors. His final trip to Anfield brought a first win in front of the crowd that tended to taunt him.

One of the abiding images of his decade-long stay atManchester Citycame away at Liverpool, Guardiola waving two fingers in the air, shouting "twice" about the penalty appeals his side saw rejected in 2019. Seven years on, some would say there have been greater injustices in thePremier League.

City have a more significant appeal than merely questioning a refereeing decision or two. The story of Guardiola's epic duel withJurgen Kloppmay require some rewriting.

Anfield, forever a hostile place for City to visit, will be still more so after the independent commissionfound them guilty of 114 of the charges the Premier League levelled. Klopp was alone among the Premier League's five definitive managers in only winning it once; that might have been different but for City's wealth.

Two years ago, when he left, the German, reflecting on the possibility points tallies of 97, 99 and 92 in seasons could have brought him three titles, said: "If you organise a bus parade, I'm in. How long it takes, I don't care.

Now employed by Germany, hehas been more circumspect in his commentssince the verdict came in. In part, it highlights the mutual respect he shares with Guardiola; even when losing to others, the Catalan always said Klopp was his greatest rival.

Perhaps Guardiola will be stripped of some of his honours now. Klopp knew he could have won more; indeed, around half of his team did secure a second Premier League, but under Arne Slot.

There was a sense, however, that each propelled the other to greater heights. Unless City's appeal succeeds, the official judgment will be that they were elevated by an illicit injection of funds, and not merely by competition from a charismatic German gegenpresser.

Liverpool always knew City had a financial advantage. Now the verdict from the independent commission is that it was an unfair advantage."