Carlolos Tevez

[Uke]

Manchester City striker Carlos Tevez is to face "disciplinary proceedings" over his alleged refusal to play in the defeat by Bayern Munich.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/15283192.stm

Verbal or written warning

Or sumary dismissal for gross misconduct?

About time a player had their contract terminated instead of being accommodated

[Ian Royal]

Sadly the only one who suffers with a contract termination is the club, unless he has to pay back his transfer value of course.

[Uke]

Sadly the only one who suffers with a contract termination is the club, unless he has to pay back his transfer value of course.

They could suspend him from playing, until salary = remaining contract value

Make him sit at a desk all day too and get fatter

Or he pays up the remainder of his contract and goes...

[Uke]

Manchester City striker Carlos Tevez is to face "disciplinary proceedings" over his alleged refusal to play in the defeat by Bayern Munich.

City launched an inquiry and suspended Tevez, 27, after he reportedly refused to come off the bench in the 2-0 loss at the Allianz Arena in September.

A statement released on Wednesday said: "There is a case for Carlos Tevez to answer of alleged breaches of contract.

"He will face disciplinary proceedings. The hearing will be convened shortly."

The statement concluded: "Carlos will be required to report to Roberto Mancini for training on Thursday."

[Hoop Blah]

Sadly the only one who suffers with a contract termination is the club, unless he has to pay back his transfer value of course.

I don't see why they can't cancel his contract but retain his registration. It's basically the registration that you pay for with a transfer fee. There must be something that stops this being possible as the media haven't suggested it as a possible outcome.

[Ian Royal]

Sadly the only one who suffers with a contract termination is the club, unless he has to pay back his transfer value of course.

I don't see why they can't cancel his contract but retain his registration. It's basically the registration that you pay for with a transfer fee. There must be something that stops this being possible as the media haven't suggested it as a possible outcome.

Possibly a restriction of trade issue though? Like in the whole Bosman thing... no longer contracted so can't command a fee.

[Hoop Blah]

Could be that I suppose.

Perhaps if they sack him they could then sue him for the lost transfer revenue which is, I think, what happened with Mutu after Chelsea sacked him.

[soggy biscuit]

Heard one employment lawyer say that Tevez could easily claim against City for constructive dismissal based around Mancini saying something like 'he will never play for us again'

[Barry the bird boggler]

The player should be suspended and forced to pay compensation to cover the money possibly lost by his club in transfer revenue etc...

[soggy biscuit]

The player should be suspended and forced to pay compensation to cover the money possibly lost by his club in transfer revenue etc...

See Chelsea & Mutu. Still rumbling on years afterwards

[Schards#2]

Shame on Gordon Taylor and the PFA for defending Tevez and refusing to sanction the 4 week fine.

He was on the radio this morning stating that constantly being asked to warm up but then not being brought on is "humiliating". The guy is being paid about £250,000 per week to do whatever his manager wants him to and, surely, warming up is part and parcel of the game.

A total loss of credibility for both Taylor and the PFA who should be fighting for the interests of the game, not the interests of pampered multi millionairre prima donnas.

[Uke]

Shame on Gordon Taylor and the PFA for defending Tevez and refusing to sanction the 4 week fine.

He was on the radio this morning stating that constantly being asked to warm up but then not being brought on is "humiliating". The guy is being paid about £250,000 per week to do whatever his manager wants him to and, surely, warming up is part and parcel of the game.

A total loss of credibility for both Taylor and the PFA who should be fighting for the interests of the game, not the interests of pampered multi millionairre prima donnas.

He was representing tevez and advising MCFC on the fines

You'd have thought he'd have clarified the situation at the end of the hearing

Unless he had some other motivation for "saving" Tevez half a million...

Why were The Sun hacking his phone?

[TheMaraudingDog]

Yeah, shame on the PFA for doing their job and backing up a player

[Schards#2]

Yeah, shame on the PFA for doing their job and backing up a player

I appreciate that all unions are a bunch of twats but, specifically in the case of the PFA, if the player is so clearly in the wrong, then they shouldn't be supporting him.

He's being paid £250,000 a week and has decided that warming up is too much to ask FFS

[TheMaraudingDog]

He might be a twat and he might be in the wrong but it's dangerous ground if the PFA start picking and choosing cases to back. Their obligation is to back up it's members.

If a pikey is getting a shoe in the police can't just sit there and watch.

[RobRoyal]

^^ Analogy fail.

[Uke]

Yeah, shame on the PFA for doing their job and backing up a player

And advising the club at the same time

No conflicts there then

[Svlad Cjelli]

But if the player's contract has the standard clause that the maximum fine is 2 weeks wages, and the club decides to breach that clause, who can really blame the PFA or anyone for pointing that out?

Especially because the PFA are fighting against a precedent which could affect every other player.

[Uke]

But if the player's contract has the standard clause that the maximum fine is 2 weeks wages, and the club decides to breach that clause, who can really blame the PFA or anyone for pointing that out?

Especially because the PFA are fighting against a precedent which could affect every other player.

Why did they not point it out at the hearing though?

[Schards#2]

But if the player's contract has the standard clause that the maximum fine is 2 weeks wages, and the club decides to breach that clause, who can really blame the PFA or anyone for pointing that out?

Especially because the PFA are fighting against a precedent which could affect every other player.

I wouldn't have a problem if Taylor has said something along the lines of "Tevez's behaviour was a disgrace but, contractually, he cannot be fined more than 2 weeks wages" but he didn't, he sought to justify Tevez's view that he shouldn't have to warm up if he didn't want to as he found it humiliating having previously warmed up and not been brought on.