Tevez

[Chinners]

Oi!!! ...... I like Inverness

[leewonpen]

Send him on loan to boundary park.In the winter its the coldest place in England

[Ted Hughes]

Seeing as Tevez has admitted to refusing to warm up. If Bob has offered him the chance to play but he 1st has to apologise for said offence, then Tevez subsequently refuses to apologise, I wonder if that then becomes Tevez' own fault that he's not playing, thus negating the 10% of games rule ?

After all, he's admitted being in the wrong & the PFA have confirmed he was in the wrong, so if he genuinely wants to play, all he has to do is say 'sorry'. If he fails to do so, is it still reasonable to say it's our fault he's not playing or would it in fact be the player who is showing no desire to play (again) ?

[Kladze]

Seeing as Tevez has admitted to refusing to warm up. If Bob has offered him the chance to play but he 1st has to apologise for said offence, then Tevez subsequently refuses to apologise, I wonder if that then becomes Tevez' own fault that he's not playing, thus negating the 10% of games rule ?

After all, he's admitted being in the wrong & the PFA have confirmed he was in the wrong, so if he genuinely wants to play, all he has to do is say 'sorry'. If he fails to do so, is it still reasonable to say it's our fault he's not playing or would it in fact be the player who is showing no desire to play (again) ?

I somehow doubt that would wash Ted.

The only thing he would be showing no desire for would be the desire to apologise.

[Chinners]

Seeing as Tevez has admitted to refusing to warm up. If Bob has offered him the chance to play but he 1st has to apologise for said offence, then Tevez subsequently refuses to apologise, I wonder if that then becomes Tevez' own fault that he's not playing, thus negating the 10% of games rule ?

After all, he's admitted being in the wrong & the PFA have confirmed he was in the wrong, so if he genuinely wants to play, all he has to do is say 'sorry'. If he fails to do so, is it still reasonable to say it's our fault he's not playing or would it in fact be the player who is showing no desire to play (again) ?

I somehow doubt that would wash Ted.

The only thing he would be showing no desire for would be the desire to apologise.

Which is technically refusing to carry out the managers instructions/wishes .... again

[Slim]

This has me annoyed, he didn't refuse to warm up, HE REFUSED TO PLAY.

The first comment from his camp was that his head wasn't right and he didn't want to go on, that was the first thing that came out the day after the Bayern game. Everything after Kia got hold of him and started this spin campaign is all bullshit that unfortunately we have been forced to swallow.

[ronk]

This has me annoyed, he didn't refuse to warm up, HE REFUSED TO PLAY.

The first comment from his camp was that his head wasn't right and he didn't want to go on, that was the first thing that came out the day after the Bayern game. Everything after Kia got hold of him and started this spin campaign is all bullshit that unfortunately we have been forced to swallow.

We've been spoon-fed it, but it's anyone's responsibility if they swallow it.

[Ted Hughes]

This has me annoyed, he didn't refuse to warm up, HE REFUSED TO PLAY.

The first comment from his camp was that his head wasn't right and he didn't want to go on, that was the first thing that came out the day after the Bayern game. Everything after Kia got hold of him and started this spin campaign is all bullshit that unfortunately we have been forced to swallow.

We've been spoon-fed it, but it's anyone's responsibility if they swallow it.

We all know that but clearly the club has bottled out of trying to prove it, so consequently, whatever the truth, the official position now is that he refused to warm up. We have failed to answer otherwise when people like Taylor & Joorabchian have stated it & we have failed to punish him for it.

[carl_feedthegoat]

This has me annoyed, he didn't refuse to warm up, HE REFUSED TO PLAY.

The first comment from his camp was that his head wasn't right and he didn't want to go on, that was the first thing that came out the day after the Bayern game. Everything after Kia got hold of him and started this spin campaign is all bullshit that unfortunately we have been forced to swallow.

We've been spoon-fed it, but it's anyone's responsibility if they swallow it.

We all know that but clearly the club has bottled out of trying to prove it, so consequently, whatever the truth, the official position now is that he refused to warm up. We have failed to answer otherwise when people like Taylor & Joorabchian have stated it & we have failed to punish him for it.

We have not bottled it at all..we just cannot prove it 100% to make it stick.I think we are playing this pretty smartly to be honest.

[Beefymcfc]

This has me annoyed, he didn't refuse to warm up, HE REFUSED TO PLAY.

The first comment from his camp was that his head wasn't right and he didn't want to go on, that was the first thing that came out the day after the Bayern game. Everything after Kia got hold of him and started this spin campaign is all bullshit that unfortunately we have been forced to swallow.

We've been spoon-fed it, but it's anyone's responsibility if they swallow it.

We all know that but clearly the club has bottled out of trying to prove it, so consequently, whatever the truth, the official position now is that he refused to warm up. We have failed to answer otherwise when people like Taylor & Joorabchian have stated it & we have failed to punish him for it.

We have not bottled it at all..we just cannot prove it 100% to make it stick.I think we are playing this pretty smartly to be honest.

Agreed. There was no 'Bottling It', we are just playing within the rules and to be truthful, it always looked like he refused to warm-up, not come on.

I said we could come out of this smelling of roses, and we have.

[Lee_R]

So how does this HAVING to play in 10% of games work then? In the past if a manager doesnt think a player is up to it.. he doesnt have to play him. If the manager thinks the player isnt mentally right.. he doesnt have t o play him.. Carlos didnt have a real pre-season so cant we argue since he hasnt played many games then he is not match fit?

I dont get how we can be forced to play him in 10% of games.. is that rule the same for players such as Wayne Bridge?

[Foreverinbluedreams]

Seeing as Tevez has admitted to refusing to warm up.

He hasn't admitted anything yet, has he? He still has time to appeal the charges.

[Foreverinbluedreams]

So how does this HAVING to play in 10% of games work then? In the past if a manager doesnt think a player is up to it.. he doesnt have to play him. If the manager thinks the player isnt mentally right.. he doesnt have t o play him.. Carlos didnt have a real pre-season so cant we argue since he hasnt played many games then he is not match fit?

I dont get how we can be forced to play him in 10% of games.. is that rule the same for players such as Wayne Bridge?

If a player doesn't play in 10% of games he can legally terminate his contract with no financial repercussion.

This doesn't apply to Bridge because he's happy to sit on his arse and collect his nice fat paycheck.

[CTID Hants]

So how does this HAVING to play in 10% of games work then? In the past if a manager doesnt think a player is up to it.. he doesnt have to play him. If the manager thinks the player isnt mentally right.. he doesnt have t o play him.. Carlos didnt have a real pre-season so cant we argue since he hasnt played many games then he is not match fit?

I dont get how we can be forced to play him in 10% of games.. is that rule the same for players such as Wayne Bridge?

I did ask a similar question about 3 or 4 pages back on this thread... I.e. if it is only league games then he has hit is limit already, but if all comps then by my maths he needs to play a couple more? No one answered, so I assume no one is sure? Either way, I suspect a suitable club will come in January, I doubt we will fetch £40M for him, but BobbyManc's wording "no player from City will be given away" I suspect that if anyone comes in at £25+M, he will go?

I thought Wayne's contract was a rolling, pay as you play which would probably not be covered by the same rulings as a "fixed five year contract" a bit like being a temp or these new contracts where people in any job used to have stability but have had to re apply for the job they have done for years?

[Mingchester Mingy]

Would just playing him in the Carling Cup Games all year, or I mean, until January work to satisfy the 10% ?

[ronk]

The 10% thing relates to a different type of dispute, tevez will have little joy in practice because he's more of a holdout than a lockout.

[Ted Hughes]

Seeing as Tevez has admitted to refusing to warm up.

He hasn't admitted anything yet, has he? He still has time to appeal the charges.

I thought Taylor said he'd admitted to refusing to warm up ? Perhaps I misunderstood.

[Buffalo Soldier]

So how does this HAVING to play in 10% of games work then? In the past if a manager doesnt think a player is up to it.. he doesnt have to play him. If the manager thinks the player isnt mentally right.. he doesnt have t o play him.. Carlos didnt have a real pre-season so cant we argue since he hasnt played many games then he is not match fit?

I dont get how we can be forced to play him in 10% of games.. is that rule the same for players such as Wayne Bridge?

I did ask a similar question about 3 or 4 pages back on this thread... I.e. if it is only league games then he has hit is limit already, but if all comps then by my maths he needs to play a couple more? No one answered, so I assume no one is sure? Either way, I suspect a suitable club will come in January, I doubt we will fetch £40M for him, but BobbyManc's wording "no player from City will be given away" I suspect that if anyone comes in at £25+M, he will go?

I thought Wayne's contract was a rolling, pay as you play which would probably not be covered by the same rulings as a "fixed five year contract" a bit like being a temp or these new contracts where people in any job used to have stability but have had to re apply for the job they have done for years?

I'm not entirely sure this applies to be honest. The 10% rule only relates to if a player is frozen out for 'non-footballing reasons'. Surely refusing to play/warm up is a footballing reason?

It's probably vague enough that the troll can get his lawyers on the case if he doesn't play the 10% though.

[Slim]

This has me annoyed, he didn't refuse to warm up, HE REFUSED TO PLAY.

The first comment from his camp was that his head wasn't right and he didn't want to go on, that was the first thing that came out the day after the Bayern game. Everything after Kia got hold of him and started this spin campaign is all bullshit that unfortunately we have been forced to swallow.

We've been spoon-fed it, but it's anyone's responsibility if they swallow it.

We all know that but clearly the club has bottled out of trying to prove it, so consequently, whatever the truth, the official position now is that he refused to warm up. We have failed to answer otherwise when people like Taylor & Joorabchian have stated it & we have failed to punish him for it.

I just don't want anyone to lose sight of what actually happened, and if they make enough noise the contrary eventually people will start buying it.

[Chopper]

It's amazing. Tevez still has a job yet Garry Cook doesn't.

You couldn't make it up.