No City sub heard Tevez refuse to play....

[Lomas has a lob on]

I suspect this story has been put out by Tevez people, there are no quotes of any such kind, and they know there on a damage limitation mission, there guy has potentially committed professional suicide, and they need to save face. Also lets just suppose Tevez only refused to warm up again, well to me thats still bad, still shows a severe lack of respect to gis boss, and the guy still deserves punishment. Tevez guarantees two things, goals and trouble, we have replaced his goals and could do with out his trouble, so from me its still adios Carlos.

 

[spacecadet]

I suspect this story has been put out by Tevez people, there are no quotes of any such kind, and they know there on a damage limitation mission, there guy has potentially committed professional suicide, and they need to save face. Also lets just suppose Tevez only refused to warm up again, well to me thats still bad, still shows a severe lack of respect to gis boss, and the guy still deserves punishment. Tevez guarantees two things, goals and trouble, we have replaced his goals and could do with out his trouble, so from me its still adios Carlos.

Spot on- no quotes, we have already heard it from the horses mouth. If City don't sue the arses of all the rags running this non Story supplied by Kia, they never will.

 

[persvenality cult]

I think it's been put out by City, to protect the team. Good people like Zabaleta really oughtn't be dragged into this. Does anyone really want team mates testifying against each other?

Hopefully we feel we can make our case/deal with Tevez without relying on them.

 

[blueprint]

All this about 100% professional?

How about this POV? All this running & scampering, without much goal assists may look good to pad his 'goals' resume' allowed him self-aggrandisement & to hog the limelight at the expense of his other teammates.

Give credence or lies to 'headless chicken' theory espoused by our neighbours.


Just once, at Munich, can't he put aside his sulk, and play for the club when he is needed MOST?

Not much of a team player is he?<br /><br />-- Fri Sep 30, 2011 7:00 am --<br /><br />

I think it's been put out by City, to protect the team. Good people like Zabaleta really oughtn't be dragged into this. Does anyone really want team mates testifying against each other?

Hopefully we feel we can make our case/deal with Tevez without relying on them.

See my previous post quoted below

Why is everybody missing the point?

The issue should be; did any sub hear Tevez AFFIRMING that he wants to come on a a sub after being asked?

Was he mentally ready or physically prepared (warming up or otherwise)?
Was he 100% confirming that he will come on as a sub?
Was he still rooted on the bench after being asked or did he get up?
Was he vacillating?
Was he Hemming & Hawing?
Was he stewing for not being selected to start?

Evidently just not only what he said but also his body language convey the MESSAGE!

Mates, please do not misconstrue the MESSAGE. IMO He did not in any shape or form indicate wanting to come on as a sub when asked. Thats the Tipping Point.

All he can mentally dwell on is his past contribution (handsomely paid) as a top City striker (currently being displaced by our other strikers justifiably so) as per his gripe when interviewed why he didn't come on.


FFS look at Milner, Kolarov when they were called to action. They were gung ho to come on & thats what we expect every city player who is proud to battle for our club .

Does the manager have to come & personally beg him to come on as a sub?

The bottom line is Tevez 'wants away'.

-- Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:46 am --

Now does this contradict that he was 100% ready to play or come on as a sub? A 100% professional?

 

[Ragnarok]

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/sep/29/robin-van-persie-carlos-tevez-manchester-city" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011 ... ester-city</a>

According to this article, the coaches sat in the dugout have supported Mancini's view that Tevez refused to play but the players are expected to cite the noise in the stadium and claim they didnt hear anything

 

[blue b4 the moon]

The media circus will continue to get all the print they can out of this especially in the build up to the swamp game.

I'd tend to believe RM as he has nothing to gain by lying, Tevez on the other hand, the more trouble he can cause (in his little head) means he has a better chance of getting away as his stock price falls. To quote his comments on chuckle 'He's a sock sucker'.

The only thing RM/the club has ballsed up on is not getting rid in the summer with setting such a high price.

 

[Marvin]

Who is sponsoring civil war?

Newspapers, or City fans masquerading as Saints who have never done anything wrong?

If Tevez gets his head down, and shows some commitment to the club and his team mates, then he can go on and play football. If he wants to defend the indefensible then he has a problem.

What tack are his advisors going to take?

He's got his family with him, he's on a great contract, he's got a chance of winning trophies. Left to himself I think he'd get on with it, and get his focus back on playing football.

City should offer him a way back, but on our terms i.e as just another member of the playing squad whose place depends on form and commitment

City should make sure that Tevez knows his current behaviour (returning to training overweight, lack of commitment, and refusal to play) is unacceptable, but there is a future for anybody who behaves like a professional.

 

[blueprint]

Exactly. 100% commitment is expected.
No prevarication.
Will that be forthcoming?

 

[persvenality cult]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/sep/29/robin-van-persie-carlos-tevez-manchester-city

According to this article, the coaches sat in the dugout have supported Mancini's view that Tevez refused to play but the players are expected to cite the noise in the stadium and claim they didnt hear anything

That's good, it affirms my view that this is being managed well. I'm not surprised some of the press want to spin it as a bombshell, a split, but it's the way it has to be.

The players don't want to turn on fellow professionals. There should be solidarity, support and trust between them. Good on the club for removing them from the equation. After all, they are just players, and this mess has little to do with them.

If it's about the communication of instructions, the enforcement of discipline and the picking of the match-day squad, that is the responsibility of the coaches and manager.

If you take the view that this is about Tevez and Kia engineering trouble to get a move, then the buying and selling of players, the composition of the squad, is ultimately the responsibility of Marwood, Cook (2008-2011), and the board.

If it's about Kia's feud with City, then I would say that the responsibility falls on the chairman and owner, as they employed Kia, signed Tevez, sacked Hughes, etc.

Players have no say in any of this.

 

[samharris]

If Tevez didnt refuse to play then why didnt he play ?? Bod obviously wanted him to. tevez= twat.