Brad Pitt's F1 Movie sparks unexpected Man City cheating theory

Get ready to bend your mind around one of the weirdest takes of the year, boys and girls - this absolutely was not on our F1 bingo card for Thursday October 8.

Leading Spanish football journalist Guillem Balague has been 'made to think' about Man City being found guilty by a Premier League investigation of a litany of charges of, essentially, financial doping.

Balague's revelation? 'What if Man City didn't actually think they were cheating, and instead think they found a loophole, like what happens in the F1 Movie (and also in real F1)?'

He then almost immediately admits: "A commission found they entered into sham agreements and broke the spending limits. A sham is an arrangement that isn’t what it claims to be, so that’s a different thing from using a gap nobody had spotted."

So, 'what if Man City were acting like a limit-pushing F1 team, using a gap that nobody spotted - except they didn't use a gap that nobody spotted, they just cheated'?

F1 HEADLINES: Hamilton Ferrari impact revealed as Verstappen questions Maranello move

Man City: Like an F1 team, but not

Relatedly, Balague once wrote an extensive and glowing biography of Pep Guardiola, who managed City between 2016 and 2026.

Just...have a read of the full tweet, and try to wrap your head around how F1 was dragged into the weirdest Man City comparison since that bloke went on 5Live and compared City to the suffragettes, and the people who died at Peterloo.

"I watched the F1 film with Brad Pitt the other day, and there’s a moment where his character asks to add something to the car that isn’t really in the rules. The FIA punishes it, but the team can still race with the earlier car. It made me think.

"In F1, the best teams live at the edge of the regulations. Sometimes the FIA allows what they’ve found, and sometimes it says that goes too far. Occasionally the rules are rewritten afterwards.

"Now, City. I’m not defending them. A commission found they entered into sham agreements and broke the spending limits. A sham is an arrangement that isn’t what it claims to be, so that’s a different thing from using a gap nobody had spotted.

"City deny it and will appeal. But I find it useful to ask/reflect on how people inside the club see it.

'We found something nobody had thought of'

"From their point of view, PERHAPS they believe they were doing what elite competitors do: looking at the rules, finding the limits, challenging interpretations and moving faster than the regulatory system.

"From the outside, you might look at that and say, 'That’s cheating'. From inside the organisation, they might say, 'We found something nobody had thought of'.

"If you believe you’ve found a way to bring money in, more or less within the rules (and the commission said it was not in the rules and it was cheating), you might tell yourself you’re just being a sharp competitor.

"We are all asking 'did City cheat?'. But I find this question interesting too: 'how did City come to believe they weren’t?'

"And understanding a mindset, or trying to, isn’t excusing it."

Got it?

No, we don't either.

READ MORE: Red Bull vindicated after extraordinary Porsche F1 deal collapse

READ MORE: F1 world champion's license downgraded by FIA