Listen carefully and perhaps you can hear the sound of wine glasses being clinked in celebration in Chelsea’s boardroom.It’s some result for them if you consider the scale of offending — financial chicanery, dodgy deals, cheating, whatever you wish to call it — that was brought before the Football Association (FA) without, ultimately, leading to anything more than a £10million fine.There will be no points deduction, in other words, for the secret payments in the Roman Abramovich era that, rather awkwardly, helped to put Chelsea into such a position that £10m is the kind of money inside Stamford Bridge to be shrugged at. Because, as we all know, if there is one way to punish a £2.5billion behemoth such as Chelsea, it is to fine them the equivalent of what they might pay one first-team player in wages per season. Or less than the payoff that Liam Rosenior allegedly received for being sacked as head coach after three months in charge.That, perhaps, is the biggest irony of this story when you compare Chelsea’s punishment to the one that, say, Everton received for going past their spending limits to breach the Premier League’s profit and sustainability rules (PSR).You may remember Everton were docked 10 points in the 2023-24 season, reduced to six on appeal. That was followed by a separate two-point penalty later that season. Nottingham Forest, meanwhile, were docked four points. Both clubs were nearly relegated as a result, a scenario that would have cost them considerably more than £10m. So let’s recap what exactly Chelsea did to warrant their 74 disciplinary charges and decide for yourself whether it was less or more serious than the disciplinary cases involving the clubs who, coincidentally, aren’t regarded as part of the Premier League’s ‘Big Six’.There was, to quote the FA’s judgment, clear evidence that Chelsea had “deliberately flouted” the system in a way that “reveals a shameful and arrogant disregard for the rules of the game, and which has done so much to bring the game of football, and the name of CFC, into disrepute.”To read through the relevant documents is to be reminded, just for starters, that Eden Hazard’s transfer from Lille was one of those over a 13-year period of repeat offending, from 2009 to 2022, when Abramovich’s Chelsea made unofficial payments to unofficial agents.Hazard is fondly remembered by many Chelsea fans as the most skilful player ever seen at Stamford Bridge. Willian, another player listed in the disciplinary charges, wasn’t too shabby, either.Maybe you can recall Ramires scoring at the Camp Nou as Chelsea reached the 2012 Champions League final at the expense of Barcelona. Nemanja Matic was another of Chelsea’s serial trophy-collectors. David Luiz, Samuel Eto’o, Andre Schurrle — all these players contributed in some way to Chelsea’s success, and growth, during the years when various fixers and middlemen were having their palms greased.In total, £47m was paid out: 44 transactions relating to 32 players, 18 of them being minors.Ramires celebrates his famous goal away to Barcelona (Josep Lago / AFP via Getty Images)To be clear, none of these players did anything wrong, and it is worth keeping in mind that Chelsea — the modern-day Chelsea, that is — flagged up the breaches as a result of their due diligence when buying the club in 2022.For that, the BlueCo consortium deserves some form of credit and, in turn, some level of mitigation when it comes to the punishment. They took the decision early on that it would be better for them in the long run to hand everything over to the authorities and be fully co-operative. And fair enough.All the same, it is quite something to see how that stance has worked in their favour.The fine, we learn, was initially set at £26m. It was then reduced by a third to £17.25m because of Chelsea contacting the authorities rather than taking the alternative position, which would have been to cover it up and potentially make matters a whole lot worse. Another third was taken off, reducing it to £11.4m, because of the club’s early guilty plea to all 74 charges. Then it was brought down again to £10m because of some unspecified fines that had apparently been handed out already.That is what is known, in old-fashioned parlance, as a “result.” No court in the land would ever be so lenient as to lop off almost two-thirds of a punishment this way. Inside the football bubble, however, the rules are different. The FA, as such, has let Chelsea off by almost £15m.The Premier League has already fined Chelsea £10.75m and, three years ago, UEFA imposed a punishment of £8.6m. So it adds up. Yet it’s still peanuts, chickenfeed, for a club of Chelsea’s wealth. The only punishment that would truly have hurt them would have been the kind of points deduction that other clubs have faced for, on the face of it, lesser offences.Let’s not forget, either, that once BlueCo uncovered what had been going on, they retained £150m as a ‘holdback’ amount from the amount they paid to complete their takeover of the club. Financially, it might even be said this has been a victory of sorts for Todd Boehly and Co.Boehly and Behdad Eghbali at Stamford Bridge in 2024 (Mike Hewitt/Getty Images)And the sport as a whole?That’s a harder one to argue while trying to figure out how the appeals board could overturn the verdict of the independent regulatory commission, namely that Abramovich’s Chelsea had sought, and gained, a sporting advantage. Because, well, just think about it for a second. What other reason was there if not to get an advantage? Chelsea, lest it be forgotten, won three Premier League titles and their first Champions League during the relevant period.“We sympathise with the current owners of CFC who now have to pay the penalty for the conduct of their arrogant predecessors, who clearly believed they were above the law (at least, metaphorically, in relation to the running of a football club) and that the FA (and Premier League and UEFA) regulations were there to be flouted and not obeyed,” read the FA’s verdict, showing the same kind of disregard for full stops.“Nevertheless, that conduct was so egregious, so persistent and of such a duration that an overall sanction, whilst taking account of the mitigation which has rightly been described as ‘very powerful’, must reflect the fact that over a period of 13 years, one of the leading clubs under the umbrella and authority of the FA, if not in Europe, behaved in such a way that the integrity of football, and the competitions in which it was competing, was seriously compromised.”Strong words, indeed.Yet Chelsea won their appeal and that meant removing the suspended six-point deduction that, unreported until the last 24 hours, had originally been put in place. Instead, a ban was imposed on Chelsea registering players for two transfer windows. Yet that was also suspended, meaning it will be irrelevant if we are to assume they aren’t planning to break any more rules.So, all in all, Chelsea can reflect that it hasn’t turned out too badly. Their owners have endured a lot of scrutiny for not being able to sustain the success of the Abramovich era. In this case, however, they are entitled to claim the moral high ground. Of more relevance, the fine is not going to hurt them to any real degree.As for the rule-keepers, the FA and the Premier League might have to understand why so many people are rolling their eyes and wondering whether it is just another case of the bigger and more powerful clubs being spared while the ones further down the ladder get shafted.And you can forgive the cynicism when, in case it has escaped your attention, there is another disciplinary matter that is currently in the system. You might have heard about it: something to do with Manchester City and at least 115 charges relating to alleged financial breaches, from 2009 to 2018. Remember that one?(Michael Regan/Getty Images)It is, after all, almost three and a half years since the Premier League announced the charges. The legal process is slow — glacier-like, indeed — and it can feel almost ludicrous that we are still waiting for a verdict and have no idea when one is coming. The hearing, led by an independent commission, concluded in December 2024.All that can be said for certain is that City are another club with the wealth to deal with a fine as if it were no more trouble than swatting away a bothersome fly. So we can safely assume they will have been taking a keen interest in what has happened to Chelsea and, in particular, the absence of any sporting sanctions.It doesn’t automatically mean that, if the case is proven against City, they would get away with a financial penalty. It does, however, make you wonder whether it is leaning that way and, whenever the day comes, whether we will hear the sound of clinking glasses in City’s boardroom, too.