Wednesday 28 September 2011

Tevez Won’t Play – Then Don’t Pay!

We don’t know exactly the details surrounding Carlos Tevez’s refusal to come on as a substitute for Manchester City last night, nor can we predict what the fall out will be. The affair though seems to give Manchester City the opportunity to redress the iniquities that their untrammelled spending have heaped upon football. City could strike a meaningful and enduring blow against the player-club contract anarchy that has resulted from the Bosman ruling.

RTG has been among the strongest of critics of both Chelsea and Manchester City. This is not because of any inbuilt antipathy towards those clubs or their supporters. The criticism is based purely on the impact of the huge amounts of unearned income that have added unacceptable levels of inflation to both transfer fees and player wages – thus exacerbating the gulf between football’s haves and have-nots and which presents the greatest danger to fair competition in football.


“He (Tevez) is one bad apple.

He can undo all the good work that has been done (at City). He's a disgrace to football. He epitomises what most people think is wrong with modern football.

It is totally unacceptable. He's a football player and he is paid to play. He is refusing to help his team-mates. It's all about him, him, him.”

Graeme Souness, speaking on Sky Sports, 27th September 2011



Most fair minded supporters would wholly endorse and agree with Souness’ comments yesterday evening. If City decide to get shot of Tevez in the next transfer window, then he gets exactly what he wants and City will undoubtedly lose many millions in his ‘fire sale’. They could also justifiably sack him for breach of his contract but, again, this would leave him a free agent and able to prostitute his wares to the highest bidder – and with no transfer fee or transfer window restrictions, he would would presumably benefit enormously in any negotiations. Who’s to say that he hasn’t manufactured this situation deliberately anyway given his many tiresome pronouncements on the subject?

City can easily sustain any losses that arise from either of these eventualities, but they also have it within their means to tackle the player ‘tail’ wagging the club ‘dog’ issue (and therefore one of football’s current major maladies). They should sue Tevez not only for breach of contract, but also for the costs associated with acquiring a replacement and/or losses resulting from his drop in value. This surely would have a longer lasting legacy for all of football and City possess the financial clout to see it through the inevitably long winded legal process.

So come on City, do the decent thing and put something back into football. Sue his ass!

Sign Up Here To Support Reclaim the Game