I'm somewhat confused as to your claims....They retested everyone after the match against Newcastle, they received the test results on monday morning and had enough negative tests to play the match against Everton monday evening.
However, since they had an increase in positive tests between friday and monday (2 players on friday, 3 players on monday), an argument was made that they had an uncontrolled spread of the virus and that more players could possibly have it even though they tested negative, and you then introduce the added risk of infecting more players.
The problem with this argument is that it goes against everything that was agreed in order to restart football. You are negative as long as you test negative, positive when you test positive, that's it. If you start with the assumption that everyone that tests negative might have the virus and be a risk in terms of infecting others, well....Furthermore, restarting first team training less than 48 hours later just undermines how daft the whole thing is. If they were really worried about an uncontrolled spread and that players were testing negative while having the virus, well feck me sideways there's still a theoretical risk for that 48 hours later...To make it even funnier, Scott Carson was one of 3 that tested positive a week later. Which means you can easily still claim that there's an uncontrolled spread at the club, yet suddenly no one is concerned any longer. It's a farce
Sheffield could make the same argument with their increase in positive results, West Ham, etc etc etc. Any single club that has a sudden increase in positive test can make the medical claim that there's now an uncontrolled spread at the club and the Premier League can't do anything but postpone the match. The entire point is that postponing the match should only happen when there's an extra circumstance, in Fulhams case they had positive tests and on matchday there were players starting to show symptoms, and so far they've had to postpone two matches, it's a wise decision. If you have a serious concern that there's an uncontrolled spread, you sure as shit isn't returning to full training less than 48 hours later.
Clubs accepted the rules, even though they are miles from being perfect. If every club does what City did when there's an increase in positive tests, which they sure as shit can in terms of medical advice, then this season is a write off.
If Rashford, Bruno and someone else tests positive after the Burnley match, everyone else tests negative, there's still the possibility that others are infected with different incubation time, and that we have an uncontrolled spread. Should we follow what was agreed, we have enough players that have tested negative so we play, or do we do a city