Erling Haaland offered a revealing, if brief, answer when asked about Manchester United, and it said almost everything about where the rivalry sits from his point of view.

Pressed on the subject, the Manchester City forward paused, laughed and admitted: “I had to think about the name.” It was a sharp reminder that, for him, United are not the reference point they once were in the city. During his four years at City, the main challengers have been Arsenal and Liverpool, not the club once regarded as the dominant force in Manchester.

The timing of the comment mattered. Haaland had already been looking ahead to City’s trip to Anfield on Sunday, and he made no attempt to soften the mood around the fixture. The Premier League’s most productive striker welcomed the expectation of a difficult reception and said he wanted it that way.

“I hope it’s like that [hostile],” Haaland insisted, “it should be like that when Man City go to Liverpool and Anfield.”

There has been plenty of talk about the atmosphere awaiting City, especially after the official announcement of the club’s guilt regarding more than 100 breaches of financial regulations. That backdrop has fuelled predictions that the home crowd will be relentlessly hostile.

Yet the picture is not quite so straightforward. Anfield retains a fearsome reputation on European nights, but the edge around the ground has not always been so intense in more ordinary circumstances. On a Sunday afternoon, the noise can only do so much.

The match itself may prove more decisive than the setting. City go into the game top of the league with a perfect record under Enzo Maresca, while Liverpool have already dropped points against Newcastle United, Nottingham Forest and Fulham, all three of whom began the day in the bottom half.

Against that backdrop, Haaland’s belief that City supporters are “going to have a good time” at Anfield does not look entirely misplaced.

Chelsea’s win over Bournemouth came with an unwelcome note, as Xabi Alonso confirmed that club captain Reece James has suffered another injury. The defender had been expected to be available after returning to training, but he was left out of the squad just a day later.

James had already missed Chelsea’s defeat to Brentford before the international break, while Thomas Tuchel also left him out of England’s squad because of injury. On Friday, Alonso had sounded encouraged, saying his captain was “ready to go” for the Bournemouth match. That made his absence on Saturday a surprise, but the reason quickly became clear after the final whistle.

Alonso said the problem emerged in training and later showed up during testing.

“He felt something in training,” Alonso said after the match. “But after we did the tests later in the afternoon he had some little issues on the knee, so we need to check how long it will be.”

The new issue was described as a knee injury, and it came during Chelsea’s final session before the game. While there was no formal diagnosis, the earlier problem James had been managing before the international break was understood to be muscular. This latest setback therefore appears to be separate, and that will concern Chelsea given the short time span involved.

Alonso declined to set a return date and instead said that “we need to assess him week by week.” A trip to Everton is Chelsea’s next league assignment, and a return there is possible in the best-case scenario. Even so, the club may choose caution because of James’s injury history and the importance of avoiding another setback.

That could mean Chelsea hold him back for longer, with a home London derby against Tottenham Hotspur on Oct. 24 mentioned as another possible target. James has started the season almost exclusively as a central midfielder under Alonso, adding further weight to the decision over when he returns.

Manchester City reportedly explored a financial settlement with the Premier League before the guilty verdict was made public, but the discussions did not progress. According to Bloomberg, the two sides had been in talks over a substantial payment that could have brought the dispute to a close. That prospect disappeared quickly for one basic reason: City would not accept wrongdoing.

The collapse of those talks came just before the Premier League confirmed City had been found guilty of inflating their finances by £900 million ($1.2 billion) between 2009 and 2018. Any punishment is expected to go well beyond a straightforward fine, leaving the club facing the possibility of sanctions that could still prove significant.

This outcome sits alongside a long-running public position from the club. Since the charges were first brought nearly four years ago, City have consistently maintained that the matter would eventually be resolved in their favour. They have repeatedly said they possess “irrefutable evidence” to support their case, but the panel examining that evidence rejected their argument and found major rule breaches.

Even after the verdict, City’s stance has not shifted. The club continue to insist on their innocence, while manager Enzo Maresca echoed that confidence in his first press conference since the decision, describing the appeal as a matter of “when,” rather than if, the club succeed.

If City overturn the verdict, there would be no sanctions at all. Their refusal to contemplate a settlement suggests the club remain convinced the final outcome can still be changed.