Tevez

[avoidconfusion]

We don't pay his wages for a few months, so that saves us a few quid.

The longer he goes without playing, the further his value drops.

Depends how tight the contact for the option to but is. He plays well, he's worth more than £17mill on the open market and we should be able to cash in. He plays crap and they have to take him for £17mill.

Well, maybe not, but there will be some wriggle room.

The guy from AC Milan says "free loan" ... that implies to me that we will still pay the wages?

[Chopper]

Makes perfect sense to me. He goes to Italy on loan. Plays a blinder for the rest of the season then we accept offers in the summer.

Simple really.

[bigblue]

Sell him for 17 mi, sue him for 23 mil. He gets his move, we get his money

[mcfc1632]

I of course agree with all the sentiments here - but I also wonder what options we have to be tough??????

Just may not be as strong a position as we would wish.

If we can keep him and be tough I am sure we will - if we let him go for a knock down price and deal - one that essentially means we have been ripped off - then I will guess that it is because our position is weak and there is a way he could otherwise walk away for even less (or free) - e.g. the FIFA regulations on mins played.

I trust our management to do the right thing - but I doubt there is a 'good' outcome available to us. These contracts are structured so much in the favour of the players

[zuricity]

I of course agree with all the sentiments here - but I also wonder what options we have to be tough??????

Just may not be as strong a position as we would wish.

If we can keep him and be tough I am sure we will - if we let him go for a knock down price and deal - one that essentially means we have been ripped off - then I will guess that it is because our position is weak and there is a way he could otherwise walk away for even less (or free) - e.g. the FIFA regulations on mins played.

I trust our management to do the right thing - but I doubt there is a 'good' outcome available to us. These contracts are structured so much in the favour of the players

You're not correct when you make references to things like "mins played".


Tevez has refused to make himself available to the club, he is even so thick as to allow himself to be photographed , like in the golf tourni in Argentina.

The guy is in serious breach of his contract. Furthermore his so called agent is making it worse for him.

City only gave permission in the last couple of days, yet that shark has been handling business for him without city's approval to negotiate for a while now. Apparently even agreeing personal terms.

Furthermore City must have a disciplinary hearing against Tevez, just like with Kolo recently.

I do not think we will see Tevez in any other teams football shirt before the end of january, even at all this season.

For the sake of football, the guy must be brought before a disciplinary commitee, or the courts of law.
Oh, and his agent

[dazby]

Milan will be just one of the options we will be looking at. He can discuss terms wherever he likes so long as the club meet our valuation.

[Hazy2]

Until MCFC speak his clan go and fudge themselfs,

[mcfc1632]

I of course agree with all the sentiments here - but I also wonder what options we have to be tough??????

Just may not be as strong a position as we would wish.

If we can keep him and be tough I am sure we will - if we let him go for a knock down price and deal - one that essentially means we have been ripped off - then I will guess that it is because our position is weak and there is a way he could otherwise walk away for even less (or free) - e.g. the FIFA regulations on mins played.

I trust our management to do the right thing - but I doubt there is a 'good' outcome available to us. These contracts are structured so much in the favour of the players

You're not correct when you make references to things like "mins played".


Tevez has refused to make himself available to the club, he is even so thick as to allow himself to be photographed , like in the golf tourni in Argentina.

The guy is in serious breach of his contract. Furthermore his so called agent is making it worse for him.

City only gave permission in the last couple of days, yet that shark has been handling business for him without city's approval to negotiate for a while now. Apparently even agreeing personal terms.

Furthermore City must have a disciplinary hearing against Tevez, just like with Kolo recently.

I do not think we will see Tevez in any other teams football shirt before the end of january, even at all this season.

For the sake of football, the guy must be brought before a disciplinary commitee, or the courts of law.
Oh, and his agent

Perhaps your are right - but I do not think so.

The appropriate FIFA article (15) is a total untested grey area. and both parties will be wanting to be careful to not be the ones to be seen to provide the other with a burden of proof.

There are 2 areas of proof that would allow Tevez to 'simply walk away from his contract'

1/ has he played in less that 10% of matches - well that is clearly in his favour

2/ is he a recognised established player for the club - that also is clearly in his favour.

That leaves us (unfairly as it might seem to any right thinking person) - having to persuade FIFA that we can prove extenuating circumstances why they should set aside their clear ruling in our favour.

We of course will argue his behaviour at the BM game and his return to Argentina. I will seem strightforward from a fans point of view - but from the POV that matters (FIFA and a possible legal challenge) we would seem to be (in my somewhat experienced opinion) to be on very dodgy ground.

Firstly there was the judgement that clearly showed that he did not refuse to play - only to further warm up. This has been delt with via the provisions of the contract between the parties. The PFA position plays strongly into the Tevez position.

That leaves us with only the departure back to Argentina. Well sorry to say, but as black and white as it might seem to us, I can see all sorts of claims to back-up this move. The manager of the club said publically that the player has not future and other comments. You could guess that there will have been some correspondence from Kia to say that he will clearly return when advised that he will play etc etc.

These guys are snakes - but clever ones. I would think that we will end up swallowing on this and they will win. Just think about it - the twats (ACM) want us to pay him for months (@£1m a month) while he plays for them -n then they will pay us about £22m - worth only £17m after we have paid 5 months of his wages. He will 'accept' half his current wages - but of course there will be a big signing-on and agents fees to compensate.

Kia and the 'bottling scum' at ACM will have worked out to best screw CITY - and (no matter what I hope) I cannot see them failing.

[Chinners]

I can, If they stick to their previous quotes it will be "full transfer now or feck off, no loan option available"

[Mikhail Chigorin]

Until MCFC speak his clan go and fudge themselfs,

Exactly.

We can also tough it out because we hold his registration and if we don't like the terms offered from any potential buyer, Tevez can continue to rot, far away from any football pitch.

Re Milan's supposed offer, we could be on a loser with any loan deal until the summer because, in his present unfit state and lacking in match practice and sharpness, Tevez would probably struggle, at least in the short term in Serie A (or in most other Leagues for that matter) and then there would be an excuse for no follow up purchase in the summer.

Given the Kaka saga, we could see if Milan have any players that we want in exchange, plus as much cash on top of that that we can screw out of them. If that doesn't suit us, then it's Goodnight Irene and don't bother calling us again.

[Dameerto]

There's no gray area about a player choosing to make himself unavailable for selection then trying to claim sporting just cause - I would eat my keyboard if he succeeded.

[Goaters 103]

After the Kaka fiasco Id screw around with Milan and piss them about no end, as much as we can in fact, on this.

No loan. Fee is £25m - pay up, or feck off. End of.

Slimeball Jaroobchian can set up any deal he wants, we hold the players Registration and until thats released, he plays nowhere. Time to take back some of the power here and flex our financial muscles. An extremely strong stance by City here shows we wont be fecked with.

Personally Id piss Milan around no end, and then see if we can do a deal with Inter on the 31st Jan - just a thought

[Foreverinbluedreams]

I of course agree with all the sentiments here - but I also wonder what options we have to be tough??????

Just may not be as strong a position as we would wish.

If we can keep him and be tough I am sure we will - if we let him go for a knock down price and deal - one that essentially means we have been ripped off - then I will guess that it is because our position is weak and there is a way he could otherwise walk away for even less (or free) - e.g. the FIFA regulations on mins played.

I trust our management to do the right thing - but I doubt there is a 'good' outcome available to us. These contracts are structured so much in the favour of the players

You're not correct when you make references to things like "mins played".


Tevez has refused to make himself available to the club, he is even so thick as to allow himself to be photographed , like in the golf tourni in Argentina.

The guy is in serious breach of his contract. Furthermore his so called agent is making it worse for him.

City only gave permission in the last couple of days, yet that shark has been handling business for him without city's approval to negotiate for a while now. Apparently even agreeing personal terms.

Furthermore City must have a disciplinary hearing against Tevez, just like with Kolo recently.

I do not think we will see Tevez in any other teams football shirt before the end of january, even at all this season.

For the sake of football, the guy must be brought before a disciplinary commitee, or the courts of law.
Oh, and his agent

Perhaps your are right - but I do not think so.

The appropriate FIFA article (15) is a total untested grey area. and both parties will be wanting to be careful to not be the ones to be seen to provide the other with a burden of proof.

There are 2 areas of proof that would allow Tevez to 'simply walk away from his contract'

1/ has he played in less that 10% of matches - well that is clearly in his favour

2/ is he a recognised established player for the club - that also is clearly in his favour.

That leaves us (unfairly as it might seem to any right thinking person) - having to persuade FIFA that we can prove extenuating circumstances why they should set aside their clear ruling in our favour.

We of course will argue his behaviour at the BM game and his return to Argentina. I will seem strightforward from a fans point of view - but from the POV that matters (FIFA and a possible legal challenge) we would seem to be (in my somewhat experienced opinion) to be on very dodgy ground.

Firstly there was the judgement that clearly showed that he did not refuse to play - only to further warm up. This has been delt with via the provisions of the contract between the parties. The PFA position plays strongly into the Tevez position.

That leaves us with only the departure back to Argentina. Well sorry to say, but as black and white as it might seem to us, I can see all sorts of claims to back-up this move. The manager of the club said publically that the player has not future and other comments. You could guess that there will have been some correspondence from Kia to say that he will clearly return when advised that he will play etc etc.

These guys are snakes - but clever ones. I would think that we will end up swallowing on this and they will win. Just think about it - the twats (ACM) want us to pay him for months (@£1m a month) while he plays for them -n then they will pay us about £22m - worth only £17m after we have paid 5 months of his wages. He will 'accept' half his current wages - but of course there will be a big signing-on and agents fees to compensate.

Kia and the 'bottling scum' at ACM will have worked out to best screw CITY - and (no matter what I hope) I cannot see them failing.

Did Pandev not use Article 15 to get out of his contract at Lazio? I believe he did, so it is not untested, there is a precedent there.
The article doesn't refer to minutes played, it refers to appearances in games.
This law only comes into effect after the season has finished, so the earliest T***z could use it is next summer.

The judgement did not clearly say that he did not refuse to play as there is no such charge. He was found guilty of refusing to follow an instruction, I can't remember the exact terminology but it's the first breach in his five breaches. Different sections of the media interpreted this how it suited them but the more reputable sections of the media interpreted it as a refusal to play.

As for the no future part, Mancini clearly went back on what he had said in the heat of the moment and publically stated that if T***z apologised he would be welcome back into the team.

The only way I can see T***z having any sort of case in court is if he can successfully prove harassment in the workplace and use that as his excuse for going AWOL, I'd be amazed though if he could prove it.

As for Milan, buy him or fuck off.

[brite blu sky]

Perhaps your are right - but I do not think so.

The appropriate FIFA article (15) is a total untested grey area. and both parties will be wanting to be careful to not be the ones to be seen to provide the other with a burden of proof.

There are 2 areas of proof that would allow Tevez to 'simply walk away from his contract'

1/ has he played in less that 10% of matches - well that is clearly in his favour

2/ is he a recognised established player for the club - that also is clearly in his favour.

That leaves us (unfairly as it might seem to any right thinking person) - having to persuade FIFA that we can prove extenuating circumstances why they should set aside their clear ruling in our favour.

We of course will argue his behaviour at the BM game and his return to Argentina. I will seem strightforward from a fans point of view - but from the POV that matters (FIFA and a possible legal challenge) we would seem to be (in my somewhat experienced opinion) to be on very dodgy ground.

Firstly there was the judgement that clearly showed that he did not refuse to play - only to further warm up. This has been delt with via the provisions of the contract between the parties. The PFA position plays strongly into the Tevez position.

That leaves us with only the departure back to Argentina. Well sorry to say, but as black and white as it might seem to us, I can see all sorts of claims to back-up this move. The manager of the club said publically that the player has not future and other comments. You could guess that there will have been some correspondence from Kia to say that he will clearly return when advised that he will play etc etc.

These guys are snakes - but clever ones. I would think that we will end up swallowing on this and they will win. Just think about it - the twats (ACM) want us to pay him for months (@£1m a month) while he plays for them -n then they will pay us about £22m - worth only £17m after we have paid 5 months of his wages. He will 'accept' half his current wages - but of course there will be a big signing-on and agents fees to compensate.

Kia and the 'bottling scum' at ACM will have worked out to best screw CITY - and (no matter what I hope) I cannot see them failing.

If that was the case then why would the PFA chief Taylor come out with the digging himself into a pit, and there is nothing he do to help Fatso.. clear breach of contract etc etc. Taylor knows the score on these things as that is a part of his job.

Respect you may have experience in the area, but I'm afraid what you suggest does not add up to me.

[zuricity]

You can drag this out as much as you like.

I don't think Tevez is going anywhere. I will be very surprised and the first to admit he's wrong if Tevez moves on to pastures green in January.

Firstly he is not currently fit for top level Football. ( I can't believe he is keeping himself fit in Argentina right now).

Secondly , we're well into December now and by the time January comes along , there will be Christmas between and
Tevez will need to get himself fit for football in January. Italy, Germany and other countries have a break until mid Jan
or end of January.

Thirdly, no amount of declarations about Tevez from City alters the fact that he is in breach of his contract of employment.
Or the way he brought this about. He voluntarily chose to go to Argentina, nobody or activity forced his hand to make him go there.

Quite frankly, even though it probably galls all parties concerned. I think he should rot on the bench, or beach and simply not be transferred. Contract law and Employment laws in the UK have priority over anything FIFA might implement.

Then see if City can take him to the cleaners.

[Ted Hughes]

He may not be fit by City's standards but he'll still beat Robinho in a sprint & cover twice as much distance in 90 mins. That goes for the other lazy cunt they have up front there too.



I think that we've either come to some sort of arrangement with Tevez or we're just waiting for things to finally unfold before we hit him with a great big stick. The idea that we've just said 'oh well we can't do anything' isn't realistic. Even Taylor knew we had Tevez by the balls so there's no chance we wouldn't fine him if we wanted to. We may have agreed to pay him in return for him dropping his wages when we sell him or some other deal.



Regarding the charge levelled at Tevez; it wasn't failing to warm up, it was misconduct & Tevez was found guilty & accepted it. Look at the first point in the misconduct charge he accepted:

Carlos Tevez has been informed in writing of the decision of the disciplinary panel, and the Club has written to the Professional Footballers Association for ratification of the fine. The five contractual obligations found by the disciplinary panel to have been breached are:

1. An obligation to participate in any matches in which the player is selected to play for the club when directed by a Club official.

2. An obligation to undertake such other duties and to participate in such other activities as are consistent with the performance of the player’s duties and as are reasonably required of him.

3. An obligation to comply with and act in accordance with all lawful instructions of any authorised official of the Club.

4. An obligation to observe the statutes and regulations of FIFA and UEFA, the FA Rules, the League Rules, the Code of Practice and the Club rules, including but not limited to breach of Rule E3(1) of the FA Rules (obligation on the player all times to act in the best interests of the game and not act in any manner which is improper or which brings the game into disrepute).

5. An obligation not to knowingly or recklessly do anything or omit to do anything which is likely to bring the Club or the game of football into disrepute or cause the player or the Club to be in breach of the Rules (as defined in the contract) or cause damage to the Club.

That's at the top of the list, No 1, not hidden in the small print. Nobody has retracted anything. He's been charged & found guilty of failing to participate in a match. The spin doctors have claimed he hasn't but it's there in black & white.

[zuricity]

Yeah, he covers twice as much distance cos he's now twice as fat :-)

[Beefymcfc]

Perhaps your are right - but I do not think so.

The appropriate FIFA article (15) is a total untested grey area. and both parties will be wanting to be careful to not be the ones to be seen to provide the other with a burden of proof.

There are 2 areas of proof that would allow Tevez to 'simply walk away from his contract'

1/ has he played in less that 10% of matches - well that is clearly in his favour - Why is this in his favour when he clearly wasn't fit and then did one, not allowing us to play him? I think you'll find that even if tested, there'd be no chance in hell that he could prove anything other than he wasn't able to play that 10%, by is own admission.

2/ is he a recognised established player for the club - that also is clearly in his favour - Yes he was, but not this year once he turned up doing his Tele-tubby impression. FIFA/UEFA would never back any of those claims, never mind a court of law.

[mcfc1632]

I of course agree with all the sentiments here - but I also wonder what options we have to be tough??????

Just may not be as strong a position as we would wish.

If we can keep him and be tough I am sure we will - if we let him go for a knock down price and deal - one that essentially means we have been ripped off - then I will guess that it is because our position is weak and there is a way he could otherwise walk away for even less (or free) - e.g. the FIFA regulations on mins played.

I trust our management to do the right thing - but I doubt there is a 'good' outcome available to us. These contracts are structured so much in the favour of the players

You're not correct when you make references to things like "mins played".


Tevez has refused to make himself available to the club, he is even so thick as to allow himself to be photographed , like in the golf tourni in Argentina.

The guy is in serious breach of his contract. Furthermore his so called agent is making it worse for him.

City only gave permission in the last couple of days, yet that shark has been handling business for him without city's approval to negotiate for a while now. Apparently even agreeing personal terms.

Furthermore City must have a disciplinary hearing against Tevez, just like with Kolo recently.

I do not think we will see Tevez in any other teams football shirt before the end of january, even at all this season.

For the sake of football, the guy must be brought before a disciplinary commitee, or the courts of law.
Oh, and his agent

Perhaps your are right - but I do not think so.

The appropriate FIFA article (15) is a total untested grey area and both parties will be wanting to be careful to not be the ones to be seen to provide the other with a burden of proof.

There are 2 areas of proof that would allow Tevez to 'simply walk away from his contract'

1/ has he played in less that 10% of matches - well that is clearly in his favour

2/ is he a recognised established player for the club - that also is clearly in his favour.

That leaves us (unfairly as it might seem to any right thinking person) - having to persuade FIFA that we can prove extenuating circumstances why they should set aside their clear ruling in our favour.

We of course will argue his behaviour at the BM game and his return to Argentina. I will seem strightforward from a fans point of view - but from the POV that matters (FIFA and a possible legal challenge) we would seem to be (in my somewhat experienced opinion) to be on very dodgy ground.

Firstly there was the judgement that clearly showed that he did not refuse to play - only to further warm up. This has been delt with via the provisions of the contract between the parties. The PFA position plays strongly into the Tevez position.

That leaves us with only the departure back to Argentina. Well sorry to say, but as black and white as it might seem to us, I can see all sorts of claims to back-up this move. The manager of the club said publically that the player has not future and other comments. You could guess that there will have been some correspondence from Kia to say that he will clearly return when advised that he will play etc etc.

These guys are snakes - but clever ones. I would think that we will end up swallowing on this and they will win. Just think about it - the twats (ACM) want us to pay him for months (@£1m a month) while he plays for them -n then they will pay us about £22m - worth only £17m after we have paid 5 months of his wages. He will 'accept' half his current wages - but of course there will be a big signing-on and agents fees to compensate.

Kia and the 'bottling scum' at ACM will have worked out to best screw CITY - and (no matter what I hope) I cannot see them failing.

Did Pandev not use Article 15 to get out of his contract at Lazio? I believe he did, so it is not untested, there is a precedent there.
The article doesn't refer to minutes played, it refers to appearances in games.
This law only comes into effect after the season has finished, so the earliest T***z could use it is next summer.

The judgement did not clearly say that he did not refuse to play as there is no such charge. He was found guilty of refusing to follow an instruction, I can't remember the exact terminology but it's the first breach in his five breaches. Different sections of the media interpreted this how it suited them but the more reputable sections of the media interpreted it as a refusal to play.

As for the no future part, Mancini clearly went back on what he had said in the heat of the moment and publically stated that if T***z apologised he would be welcome back into the team.

The only way I can see T***z having any sort of case in court is if he can successfully prove harassment in the workplace and use that as his excuse for going AWOL, I'd be amazed though if he could prove it.

As for Milan, buy him or fuck off.

Guys - I am a CITY fan 0f 40+ years and I am of course not seeking to 'defend' him in any way

But there is far too much 'fan view' on here that disregards the 'legal' reality.

A CITY fan. but I am also a person well versed in eruopean contract law - multi-£billions contracts for 20+ years

I WANT him to be fucked!!! big time

Unfortunately - and I want to be wrong!!! - all my experience tells me that we will reach an accommodation that means that we will:

a) feel we have been royally screwed
b) is in reality the best we could achieve in the environment of the moment
c) will see us slagged off as gutless by the press
d) will actually help with our FFPR position and
e) will fade into memory over the years when we have won so much - but he (and Kia-twat) will have banked £millions at our expense - hopefully the lesson is reflected in the future contracts we sign

[mcfc1632]

Perhaps your are right - but I do not think so.

The appropriate FIFA article (15) is a total untested grey area. and both parties will be wanting to be careful to not be the ones to be seen to provide the other with a burden of proof.

There are 2 areas of proof that would allow Tevez to 'simply walk away from his contract'

1/ has he played in less that 10% of matches - well that is clearly in his favour - Why is this in his favour when he clearly wasn't fit and then did one, not allowing us to play him? I think you'll find that even if tested, there'd be no chance in hell that he could prove anything other than he wasn't able to play that 10%, by is own admission.

2/ is he a recognised established player for the club - that also is clearly in his favour - Yes he was, but not this year once he turned up doing his Tele-tubby impression. FIFA/UEFA would never back any of those claims, never mind a court of law.

Sorry Beefy - whilst I am totally behind you as a fan - this is not how regulations and law works

The PFA support for Tevez fucked us - we now will (even if we fans hate it) find the best way out and they will win - I will buy many pints in the Townley if I am wrong on this - but I will not be (IMO)