tevez to miss liverpool game

[Royaloak]

your talking about ethics here. I subscribe to the idea that our players are human beings first, manchester city players second. if we understand that, we should be able to allow them time to fulfill themselves, both for us, and for themselves. anything less than that appears to be the fergie school of '100% utd or out of the door'. that approach may have worked when footballers were subject to punitive, restrictive contract law, but we all now know that you can't hold anyone to a contract that denies them their essential human rights in law, and we all know that because of the scarcity of genuinely talented players, they are in a stronger position to ask for whatever it is that they want to make themselves happy. if they need time off to sort out genuine personal/family issues, then so be it. we hope they come back refreshed, and grateful for the accomodations we have provided. on the other hand, if it is just money they are after, then that must be justified on the pitch.

For £160k a week, you'd hope that we could avoid all of the Human Rights Liberal bullshit that has turned the UK into the international laughing tock that we have become. I can guarantee that the pussy approach to management will be as unsuccessful in football as it is in business - good guys come second - or in our case nowhere.

like I say, there are good reasons to believe Carlos Tevez is absent due to a difficult family situation. We could force him to play now, but, what message would that give to any other international players that we wanted to sign, what message would it give to those in the squad? All we care about is you turning out for us week in week out, regardless? they are the ones with the talent, the ones with the ability to chose their clubs. for me it is imperative that we offer them an enviroment, a managerial philosophy that takes these things into account. not that I am saying we should allow players to walk over us. far from it.

 

[Royaloak]

your talking about ethics here. I subscribe to the idea that our players are human beings first, manchester city players second. if we understand that, we should be able to allow them time to fulfill themselves, both for us, and for themselves. anything less than that appears to be the fergie school of '100% utd or out of the door'. that approach may have worked when footballers were subject to punitive, restrictive contract law, but we all now know that you can't hold anyone to a contract that denies them their essential human rights in law, and we all know that because of the scarcity of genuinely talented players, they are in a stronger position to ask for whatever it is that they want to make themselves happy. if they need time off to sort out genuine personal/family issues, then so be it. we hope they come back refreshed, and grateful for the accomodations we have provided. on the other hand, if it is just money they are after, then that must be justified on the pitch.






like I say, there are good reasons to believe Carlos Tevez is absent due to a difficult family situation. We could force him to play now, but, what message would that give to any other international players that we wanted to sign, what message would it give to those in the squad? All we care about is you turning out for us week in week out, regardless? they are the ones with the talent, the ones with the ability to chose their clubs. for me it is imperative that we offer them an enviroment, a managerial philosophy that takes these things into account. not that I am saying we should allow players to walk over us. far from it.

For £160k a week, you'd hope that we could avoid all of the Human Rights Liberal bullshit that has turned the UK into the international laughing tock that we have become. I can guarantee that the pussy approach to management will be as unsuccessful in football as it is in business - good guys come second - or in our case nowhere.

 

[Bonol]

Tevez is a different kettle of fish to those shithouse brazilians. He loves playing footbal and gives his all. Hope the birth goes well and Tevez is back playing football soon.

 

[Revol]

Anyone know if Bellamy will be back?

Although he will be notable by his absence, Tevez not being there will give other great players such as Ade and SWP a chance to shine.

 

[Dubai Blue]

In my experience of living abroad over the last nine years, about 90% of the expats I know who've had kids have gone back home to have them. It's not so much the nationality issue and more to do with what they're comfortable with. The birth of your child is the most important thing you'll ever do and for that reason you do it where you feel most at ease. In England, she only has her husband with her. In Argentina, she has her whole extended family there to help out and support her. Presumably she will remain there with the baby for a few months now, with Carlos returning here ASAP (Mancini has only ever mentioned him missing tonight's game). What they've done is no different to what the vast majority of expats do.

And if he was truly going to fulfill his contract like you suggested he should, we'd be without him for the rest of the season. So try to have a bit more compassion.

I might be missing something here, but I don't understand the last paragraph. This thread is about him missing the Liverpool game, so my posts are in response to that eventuality. You see, in life, you can't have it both ways. Carlos is on a deal which is probably 20 times what he could earn in Argentina and on that basis, his responsibilities to fulfil that contract are significant - if he's not happy with that, he should have stayed at Boca Juniors earning £8k a week.

If he misses a couple of games, no problem, but Liverpool is looking unlikely and at the moment and there is no forecast return date. Added to that is the fact that he won't have trained for a while and who know's how many games he'll miss?

His situation is understandable from a family viewpoint, but from a contractual viewpoint it seems that the club are getting the shitty end of the stick - afterall, City are a footbll club, not a Local Authority, where you get a weeks compassionate leave if the hamster dies - is that compassionate enough for you or would you like me to post a video of me in floods of tears as well?.

It will be stipulated in the contract that you wish him to fulfill that he is entitled to 3 months unpaid paternity leave if he wishes to take it. Perhaps the club realise that granting him a bit of leeway on compassionate grounds now is better than losing him for the remainder of the season if we pissed him off. You might not like it, but the players have all the power now and the clubs have to bend over backwards to accommodate them. At least he actually has a valid reason for fucking off to the other side of the world, unlike that perennial shithouse bottler Robinho.

And the only people to have claimed he will miss the Liverpool game are tabloid journalists. Mancini has only mentioned tonight's game, so let's just wait and see.

 

[Project]

Are people seriously arguing against the decision to allow him time off? Jeez.

 

[Royaloak]

I might be missing something here, but I don't understand the last paragraph. This thread is about him missing the Liverpool game, so my posts are in response to that eventuality. You see, in life, you can't have it both ways. Carlos is on a deal which is probably 20 times what he could earn in Argentina and on that basis, his responsibilities to fulfil that contract are significant - if he's not happy with that, he should have stayed at Boca Juniors earning £8k a week.

If he misses a couple of games, no problem, but Liverpool is looking unlikely and at the moment and there is no forecast return date. Added to that is the fact that he won't have trained for a while and who know's how many games he'll miss?

His situation is understandable from a family viewpoint, but from a contractual viewpoint it seems that the club are getting the shitty end of the stick - afterall, City are a footbll club, not a Local Authority, where you get a weeks compassionate leave if the hamster dies - is that compassionate enough for you or would you like me to post a video of me in floods of tears as well?.

It will be stipulated in the contract that you wish him to fulfill that he is entitled to 3 months unpaid paternity leave if he wishes to take it. Perhaps the club realise that granting him a bit of leeway on compassionate grounds now is better than losing him for the remainder of the season if we pissed him off. You might not like it, but the players have all the power now and the clubs have to bend over backwards to accommodate them. At least he actually has a valid reason for fucking off to the other side of the world, unlike that perennial shithouse bottler Robinho.

And the only people to have claimed he will miss the Liverpool game are tabloid journalists. Mancini has only mentioned tonight's game, so let's just wait and see.

You seem very ITK about the contract - were you on either side of the deal, or are you a barrack room lawyer?

If, however, assuming what you say is true, just for the moment, it brings into focus even more the need to avoid signing South American and African players - too much baggage.

 

[Balti]

Some things are more important than football despite what Shankly said.

 

[Blueboy Danny]

Some things are more important than football despite what Shankly said.

My sentiments exactly, I really do worry about the lack of compassion some people show on this forum, we had the same mindless and insesitive comments after Ade's traumatic experience, hope the pregnency goes well and the baby is a healthy one.

 

[Royaloak]

Some things are more important than football despite what Shankly said.

Which, if you believe that, you shouldn't sign a very lucrative contract which obliges you to be 6,500 miles away from the place you consider as home and where you are basing your domestic arrangements.

I personally do agree with that, which is why, over the years, I have refused to move to far flung corners of the globe, which, whilst undoubtedly advancing my career, was not acceptable to the Missus who didn't want to uproot the kids.