Norway manager Ståle Solbakken has strongly rejected claims that Manchester City intervened to prevent Erling Haaland from facing the media following the latest developments surrounding the club’s financial case.

The controversy emerged after Haaland was withdrawn from a scheduled media appearance with Norway, prompting speculation that Manchester City had asked the Norwegian national team to protect its star striker from questions about the club.

However, Solbakken has insisted that the decision was entirely his own.

The Norway boss reportedly reacted angrily to suggestions that City had influenced the decision, describing the allegation as a serious attack on his integrity. He also challenged those making the claim to examine his communications, saying his phone records could demonstrate that there had been no conversation with Manchester City about shielding Haaland from the media.

“I haven’t spoken to City about media since Erling moved from Dortmund,” Solbakken said, according to reports. “I can’t put up with lies. It undermines my integrity.”

Why Was Haaland Withdrawn From Media Duties?

Haaland had been expected to participate in media activities with the Norwegian national team ahead of an important international fixture.

His withdrawal came at a particularly sensitive moment because of the attention surrounding Manchester City’s financial case. The timing immediately generated speculation about whether the Premier League club wanted its leading striker kept away from questions concerning the verdict.

Norway subsequently used other players for the media duties instead of Haaland.

Solbakken’s explanation, however, was considerably different from the speculation.

The Norway manager said that he made the decision because he wanted Haaland to remain focused on football and avoid unnecessary distractions before the match. In his view, allowing the striker to become the centre of questions about Manchester City’s legal situation could have shifted attention away from Norway’s preparations.

That explanation places responsibility for the decision firmly with the Norwegian coaching staff rather than Manchester City.

The Claim That Manchester City Was Involved

The controversy intensified after NRK commentator Jan Petter Saltvedt questioned whether Manchester City had been involved in the decision.

The argument was based largely on the timing of Haaland’s withdrawal and the fact that the media interest surrounding City had increased following the financial verdict.

However, an allegation or commentary-based suggestion is not the same as evidence that Manchester City actually instructed Norway to protect Haaland.

Solbakken has rejected that interpretation emphatically.

The Norwegian manager said he had not been communicating with Manchester City about media arrangements involving Haaland since the striker left Borussia Dortmund for the English club. He also indicated that his communications could be examined to support his version of events.

That is significant because it directly challenges the suggestion that City had contacted Norway behind the scenes.

Solbakken Defends His Integrity

Solbakken’s strongest objection appears to be the suggestion that another club was effectively controlling his decisions as Norway manager.

For a national-team coach, decisions about player availability for press conferences and other media obligations are normally part of the team’s own preparation and communication process.

The claim that Manchester City ordered Norway to remove Haaland from media duties therefore carries a much stronger implication than simply suggesting that the club preferred its player not to discuss the financial case.

Solbakken’s response was consequently forceful.

By offering his communications as evidence, he has effectively challenged the people making the allegation to substantiate it rather than allowing speculation to become accepted as fact.

What We Know — And What Remains Disputed

The facts surrounding the controversy should be separated from the speculation.

It is established that Haaland was withdrawn from the scheduled media appearance.

It is also established that the decision came at a time when Manchester City’s financial case was generating significant international attention.

What remains disputed is who was responsible for the decision and whether Manchester City had any involvement.

Solbakken says the decision was his and that he did not discuss the matter with Manchester City.

The claims that City instructed Norway to shield Haaland have not been established as fact by the reporting currently available.

That distinction is particularly important because social-media posts can easily transform a commentator’s suggestion into an apparently confirmed event.

Haaland Remains Focused on Norway

For Haaland himself, the episode is another example of the enormous media attention surrounding the Manchester City forward.

His performances for Norway have made him one of the country’s most important sporting figures, while his status as a Manchester City player means that developments at club level inevitably attract questions during international duty.

Solbakken’s decision appears to have been aimed at keeping the focus on Norway’s sporting objectives rather than allowing the striker’s press conference to become dominated by questions about Manchester City’s financial affairs.

Whether one agrees with the decision or not, the manager has made his position clear: he says Manchester City did not force Norway to withdraw Haaland from media duties.

Until independent evidence establishes otherwise, the claim that City ordered Norway to shield Haaland should therefore be treated as an allegation rather than a confirmed fact.

The controversy ultimately highlights the difficulty national teams face when their biggest stars are simultaneously at the centre of major club-level news stories. In Haaland’s case, Solbakken insists that the decision to keep him away from the microphones was made in Norway, not Manchester.

What do you think about Solbakken’s explanation? Share your thoughts in the comments.