Sport

TV presenter’s rant pointing out double-standard over Sheffield Wednesday punishment goes viral

'As a Sheffield Wednesday fan you look at the difference at how the bigger and smaller clubs are treated.'

Danny Jones Danny Jones - 18th March 2026

A TV presenter and Sheffield Wednesday supporter's speech about the perceived double standard concerning another pending points deduction at her club compared to the punishment of Premier League clubs is trending online.

Many believe she's pretty bang on the money, to be fair.

Wednesdayite Sophy Ridge, who hosts a regular Sky News show with fellow presenter Wilfred Frost, recently took the opportunity to indulge in some understandable fan frustration during a show this week.

Admittedly, getting on her soapbox a bit - and for good reason - the Richmond-born Owls fan simply shed light on the contradictory nature of Sheffield Wednesday's penalty set for the next season over financial violations when compared to top-flight offenders.

Citing both Manchester City (with their estimated 115-130 charges still no closer to being resolved) and now Chelsea as being the most recently accused of breaking regulations, she argued that there's a significant difference between penalties teams are being slapped with - or in some cases, still avoiding.

For instance, while the Man City saga first broke back in February 2023 and relates to alleged breaches dating all the way back to 2009, they are yet to be confirmed as guilty, at least not in any public announcement.

As for the West London club, Chelsea have only just been hit with a fine, albeit a Premier League record sum of approximately £10.75 million, as well as a 12-month transfer ban, though it has already been suspended for two years.

This is due to them having made undisclosed payments to agents, players and various other individuals during the Roman Abramovich ownership era.

Meanwhile, for anyone who hasn't been following the huge furore among the long-suffering Sheffield fanbase, Wednesday fans, players, and footballing staff are the ones being penalised for what many believe is nothing more than 'improper' and 'irresponsible' management of the club at an executive level.

For context, they are currently set to start the next 2026/27 campaign in the EFL's third tier with a 15-point handicap, which could very well spell yet another disaster year, with Ridge adding: "How attractive is that [a club sale] going to be for an owner that might be looking at back-to-back relegations?"

https://thehootleeds.com/the-sheff/sheffield-wednesday-could-be-set-for-a-starting-points-deduction-next-season/

Sadly, it seems that its matchgoers and other die-hards are the ones set to pay the price this time, as they often have been; according to the sports journalist, that's often the case further down the pyramid.

For instance, Todd Boehly's Chelsea organisation seem to have been let off the hook regarding any setback in the standings due to their cooperation with the profit and sustainability (PSR) investigation, and because their offence pre-dates the modern PSR guidelines era.

In fact, Chelsea were actually said to have voluntarily reported themselves regarding historic offences within youth football, which also seems to have afforded them some leniency.

Put simply, she believes it's unfair for the soon-to-be League One side to face such harsh terms and a fee just a few million shy of the figure they've been told they 'must' pay outgoing owners, Dejphon Chansiri, while Chelsea face "no sanctions despite the fact this [illegal spending] clearly would have given them a sporting advantage" in the past.

What do you make of the whole saga, and do you think there's a difference in how so-called 'bigger' clubs are treated compared to those in lower divisions?

Read more:

Featured Images — Sky News (screenshot)/Daniel Bagshaw (via Wikimedia Commons)