PFA Back Tevez

[Prodigal Son]

it's the tone of taylor's comments that stick in my throat. Perhaps the PFA are duty bound to support players, perhaps they do so sometimes through gritted teeth, though it's the drone of taylor in that kind of "nah, nanny nah nahhhhh..... we're right and yourrrr wronnnnnnnnng" way that makes we want to throttle the little wanker. Can we sue the PFA for immoral behaviour in blatantly supporting the unsupportable liar?

Didn't he say in his statement 'Carlos was desperate to play'? Oh just fuck off Gordon.

 

[u2fme2]

no bloody surpise there is there?
bunch of self serving tossers

 

[johnny crossan]

So the PFA (i.e. Gordon) prefer Tevez's account of what happened in Munich to Mancini's account. Ergo the PFA (i.e. Gordon) is calling Mancini a liar. Maybe in the light of the Tevez post match interview Mancini should contemplate a suit for defamation against the PFA (i.e. Gordon).

 

[john@staustell]

I note the PFA didn't/aren't paying the wages of Plymouth players under hardship when the club cant? But still pay 80s-relic Taylor nearly £1M. The 2-week rule was stop players getting into hardship too. I'm sure he feels he's acheived something saving Tevez from hardship!

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-12402734" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bi ... m-12402734</a>

The chairman of the Professional Footballers' Association (PFA), says he is not embarrassed at being paid seven times more than the prime minister.

Former Birmingham City winger, Gordon Taylor, is reportedly paid almost £1m a year in his role.

In an interview for BBC WM Hardtalk, Mr Taylor said it was not up to him to justify his salary.

Asked if he was embarrassed about his reported salary of £984,000, he said every worker is "worth their hire".

Mr Taylor has been involved with the PFA - the trade union for English footballers - since the 1980s.

'Short career'
In the interview, Mr Taylor said: "I don't think it's up to me to justify.

"It's up to (the) management committee because I don't write my own salary out.

"There's a finance committee and they work out our income and expenditure and I suppose they might just have thought what are the assets of the PFA now compared to when he came in and what does he negotiate for us each year.

"I wouldn't want any of my members and neither myself to be embarrassed about it... Every labour is worth his hire, that's going to back to the Bible," he added.

"The whole object of the players' association is to try and make sure that any individual is able to capitalise on his ability, particularly in football which is a very short career."

 

[hgblue]

So the PFA (i.e. Gordon) prefer Tevez's account of what happened in Munich to Mancini's account. Ergo the PFA (i.e. Gordon) is calling Mancini a liar. Maybe in the light of the Tevez post match interview Mancini should contemplate a suit for defamation against the PFA (i.e. Gordon).

It's the club that failed to find sufficient proof to charge Tevez with refusing to play. Apparently not a single one of Mancini's own staff could be found to support his version of events. In the light of this it's hardly surprising that the PFA has adopted this stance.

 

[johnny crossan]

So the PFA (i.e. Gordon) prefer Tevez's account of what happened in Munich to Mancini's account. Ergo the PFA (i.e. Gordon) is calling Mancini a liar. Maybe in the light of the Tevez post match interview Mancini should contemplate a suit for defamation against the PFA (i.e. Gordon).

It's the club that failed to find sufficient proof to charge Tevez with refusing to play. Apparently not a single one of Mancini's own staff could be found to support his version of events. In the light of this it's hardly surprising that the PFA has adopted this stance.

maybe he should sue you too

 

[Skashion]

It's the club that failed to find sufficient proof to charge Tevez with refusing to play. Apparently not a single one of Mancini's own staff could be found to support his version of events. In the light of this it's hardly surprising that the PFA has adopted this stance.

1. Reputable source for that please and not some Kia statement via a friendly journalist. What about the words out of Tevez's own mouth as well saying he wasn't right to play? They apparently carry no weight as evidence.
2. The club did find sufficient proof, although it did not say on which specific charges but the overall matter clearly was upheld: <a class="postlink" href="http://mcfc.co.uk/News/Club-news/2011/October/club-statement-Carlos-Tevez-Oct-25" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://mcfc.co.uk/News/Club-news/2011/O ... vez-Oct-25</a>
3. No, it isn't strange as Carlos pays their bills but then there would seem to be a staggering conflict of interest of requiring someone to levy a fine who's being paid by the person upon whom the fine is being levied. I think the club are right to raise that as an objection. Apparently turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Who'd have thunk?

 

[hgblue]

So the PFA (i.e. Gordon) prefer Tevez's account of what happened in Munich to Mancini's account. Ergo the PFA (i.e. Gordon) is calling Mancini a liar. Maybe in the light of the Tevez post match interview Mancini should contemplate a suit for defamation against the PFA (i.e. Gordon).

It's the club that failed to find sufficient proof to charge Tevez with refusing to play. Apparently not a single one of Mancini's own staff could be found to support his version of events. In the light of this it's hardly surprising that the PFA has adopted this stance.

maybe he should sue you too

That's why I said 'apparently' :-).

 

[cibaman]

So the PFA (i.e. Gordon) prefer Tevez's account of what happened in Munich to Mancini's account. Ergo the PFA (i.e. Gordon) is calling Mancini a liar. Maybe in the light of the Tevez post match interview Mancini should contemplate a suit for defamation against the PFA (i.e. Gordon).

It's the club that failed to find sufficient proof to charge Tevez with refusing to play. Apparently not a single one of Mancini's own staff could be found to support his version of events. In the light of this it's hardly surprising that the PFA has adopted this stance.

Players are notoriously reluctant to get involved in player disputes. As Cascarino said they always think "it could be me". Remember when Joey Barton upset everyone when handed in a transfer request how much support he got from players like Richard Dunne?

Its also noticeable in the current Terry controversy (how glad I am that we didnt buy him) just how reluctant players are to get involved.

 

[johnny crossan]

1. Reputable source for that please and not some Kia statement via a friendly journalist. What about the words out of Tevez's own mouth as well saying he wasn't right to play? They apparently carry no weight as evidence.
2. The club did find sufficient proof, although it did not say on which specific charges but the overall matter clearly was upheld: <a class="postlink" href="http://mcfc.co.uk/News/Club-news/2011/October/club-statement-Carlos-Tevez-Oct-25" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://mcfc.co.uk/News/Club-news/2011/O ... vez-Oct-25</a>
3. No, it isn't strange as Carlos pays their bills but then there would seem to be a staggering conflict of interest of requiring someone to levy a fine who's being paid by the person upon whom the fine is being levied. I think the club are right to raise that as an objection. Apparently turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Who'd have thunk?

nicely put - here's the musical version

Gordon is a moron