Pep Guardiola has gone on the offensive ahead of Manchester City’s crunch showdown with Arsenal at the Emirates. His target? Premier League hypocrisy on spending.

“Only I want to say to my friend Mikel Arteta, if he wins the title, it will be because of spending,” Guardiola declared with surgical precision. Translation: if City’s dominance gets dismissed as money-driven, then Arsenal and Liverpool should face the same narrative.

The timing couldn’t be sharper. Arsenal are no longer plucky challengers; they’re genuine contenders, fueled by a £250M transfer spree. Liverpool? They’ve reportedly splashed over £400M to rebuild. City has spent too… around £330M across two windows. Guardiola insists his team is judged by different rules.

Yes, Pep praised Arsenal’s rise under Arteta, hailing their “step by step” growth into one of Europe’s toughest sides. But make no mistake: his words carried bite. Why does Arsenal’s big spending get praised as ambition, while City’s is framed as buying success?

Sunday’s clash is bigger than three points. For Arsenal, it’s about proving money well spent can finally deliver silverware. For City, it’s about showing that tactical brilliance, discipline, and experience still set the benchmark.

Guardiola’s wider point slices into the heart of modern football: no Premier League champion is built without serious investment. The real difference lies in perception. When City win, critics shout about chequebooks. When Arsenal or Liverpool close the gap, pundits praise “smart planning.”

This Emirates showdown is more than just Arsenal vs City. It’s a battle over football’s spending narrative. Yes, money matters. But greatness in the Premier League demands more: strategy, chemistry, and execution.

Guardiola’s reminder is clear: City’s legacy isn’t only about the billions, but it’s about what they’ve done with them.