PFA Back Tevez

SuperKevinHorlock said:
Gordon Taylor is a rag Fergie cock sucker as I informed him after the Cup Final.

But I agree the PFA have to support Tevez(it's what unions are supposed to do)


Anyone else sick of the whole Tevez saga?
Click to expand...


you really like him then? LOL mate nice one
 
People need to open their minds to the possibility that Carlos didn't refuse to play and refused to warm up again, and in the confusion of a busy noisy touchline this was misinterpreted by the manager. Still a serious offence but not as serious as a refusal to play. Hence the PFA statement and the very carefully worded club statement that falls short of accusing him of refusing to play.
 
chesterbells said:
jimharri said:
Serious question; what did you expect the Professional FOOTBALLERS Association to do? Back the club against one of its members?
Click to expand...

What I expect them to do is not necessarily back the club, but also not to publicly go big backing a case in which they lose all credibility. Yes, unions back their members generally, but if they do so in every case, regardless of the circumstances their credibilty is shot for the future.

Its only his union, (not his defence lawyer in a criminal trial)
Click to expand...
Gordon Taylor is (I think) the highest paid union chief in the UK. That salary is largely paid by the weekly dues paid by Carlos, Wayne, Didier etc etc. Taylor not backing a PFA member to the hilt would not go down well with his members. I know if I was in his position I would do EXACTLY the same as he's done.
 
City should release a statement saying Carlos is innocent of everything, is a model professional and will not be fined anything. We as a club hold Carlos in the highest regard and we would love to release him in january in accordance with his wishes for the correct Market value.
The whole of football knows what a **** he is and leave it at that.
 
hgblue said:
People need to open their minds to the possibility that Carlos didn't refuse to play and refused to warm up again, and in the confusion of a busy noisy touchline this was misinterpreted by the manager. Still a serious offence but not as serious as a refusal to play. Hence the PFA statement and the very carefully worded club statement that falls short of accusing him of refusing to play.
Click to expand...
It makes no difference what he did or didn't refuse to do, or what Mancini did or didn't understand/misunderstand.

The simple fact is that an investigation found him guilty on 5 counts, good enough for me, no need to open my mind.

Guilty, f**k off from our club, easy.
 
cleavers said:
hgblue said:
People need to open their minds to the possibility that Carlos didn't refuse to play and refused to warm up again, and in the confusion of a busy noisy touchline this was misinterpreted by the manager. Still a serious offence but not as serious as a refusal to play. Hence the PFA statement and the very carefully worded club statement that falls short of accusing him of refusing to play.
Click to expand...
It makes no difference what he did or didn't refuse to do, or what Mancini did or didn't understand/misunderstand.

The simple fact is that an investigation found him guilty on 5 counts, good enough for me, no need to open my mind.

Guilty, f**k off from our club, easy.
Click to expand...

In the context of the PFA statement that the club can't fine him 4 weeks wages because he didn't refuse to play then yes it does make a difference, and since that's what this thread was about then of course it's relevant.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.