I come at this from a slightly different angle to almost all on here. I am what many on here would consider a "glory hunter," having only started supporting City in early 2009. In my defense, I didn't know anything about the takeover at the time.
So hear me out.
I had gotten into the sport as a result of endless FIFA 2006 World Cup sessions with my old roommate. Having gotten to know many international players names, and been ever so passionate for a virtual version, I decided I wanted to pick an English team (as the Premier League gets by far the most attention over here — and yes, even worse, I'm American). So I researched all the clubs and came to City for a few reasons. My go-to team in aforementioned game was Wales, and Bellamy scored countless goals for me. And after researching respective clubs histories, I decided City was the most natural fit. I'm a Cleveland Indians fan, a team notoriously unlucky which I felt connected me to "Typical City" and it gave me the opportunity to hate Man U, as I knew a few of their supporters over here and they were mostly the dregs, and that United was basically the Yankees equivalent.
Since then I've fallen deeply in love with the club and I've tried to participate here as best and respectful as I can. I can't watch City games with any other person present and I stand no more than three feet from the TV, clapping and audibly complaining about decisions.
This may all seem rather silly to many, and I don't blame you. But I would put my passion for City up against any on here. I am in this now for life. I do however think this "outside" perspective gives me a different insight.
I think the sentiment of 'title at all costs' is perfectly understandable, and certainly not something that reflects poorly on the City fans who hold that view. And if Tevez were to come back harmoniously and score important goals in the run in and City won the title, their thoughts would likely have been proven accurate.
Even if he were to come back, I don't think his return would help the team. It would certainly upset whoever who loses playing time (guessing Dzeko here and Mario to a lesser extent), and probably not sit well with many others, regardless of their public statements. Tevez did not just disrespect the fans and Mancini, but his teammates perhaps most of all, and I don't think that's something lightly forgotten. And can he really be trusted, after all that has transpired, to keep his mouth shut, his head down and let his play do the talking?
I think we had a post-Christmas downturn just as we did last year (not helped by the officiating), but that things are starting to turn around. Unlike many I don't think he's necessary to win the title.
I think it's folly to expect positive results if he returns. Everything about Tevez' relationship with City up to now screams to me that this latest return on his part — countered by the statements by players and Mancini — is only more gamesmanship in the battle of will and LEGAL ISSUES between Tevez and Kia versus City. They're trying to create a scenario in which they can claim Tevez is not being selected for the required number of games, and can void his contract, THEREBY ALSO ENSURING even higher wages from Milan and a bigger agent fee for Kia.
We scored a great victory over them during the transfer window, and made a clear statement that the club is no longer a pushover and has joined the European elite in not just performance but also image and perception (and frankly seems more a more professional, business-wise club than its competitors both domestic and abroad). Tevez and Kia desperately wanted to join Milan, and were more or less actively colluding (as evidenced by public statements and the refusal to accept terms with other clubs) with the Italian outfit to engineer a cut-price move.
Khaldoon famously laid the smack down in clear terms, slamming Milan, which could only infuriate the Tevez camp. Some argue that the reason why he is coming back now is to collect wages, but I think it's just as likely that they're deliberately attempting to sow division in order to further "persuade" City to accept a lower fee than we desire, by making himself such a toxic part that it would be worth it to accept a cheap deal.
The interview itself does nothing to dissuade my view (I have read the translated Twitter version on here, and don't have any Sky coverage). There are not-so subtle hints that there has been no change in attitude from the Tevez camp toward Mancini. The public perception, certainly inflamed by media outlets, will be that he has made no legitimate apology (he even says in the interview that he doesn't feel he did anything wrong) and has usurped Mancini's authority, undermining the manager's position. (This is predicated on him not making a public, sincere — or at least seemingly sincere, without equivocation — apology. If he were to do that, then that would clear the air for his return to the pitch.)
Of course I could be entirely wrong, in which you can all point to me and scoff and say how naive I was. But until we're getting glowing training reports and eventually on the pitch performance, coupled with a general media silence (if not in totality, in spirit i.e. avoiding controversial statements), I have little doubt that this is just one more ploy in this continuing game of Chicken. Maybe it's because I'm not personally, first hand invested in City's history that lets me take a detached view. But in terms of public relations this interview, on the eve of his return, offers no real olive branch and leaves enough doubt regarding his intentions to create a swirl of negative attention and doubt when City can least afford it.
*Fuck me it's nearly 5 a.m. here and I just wrote 1,000 words, I think that's proof I'm not actually an uncaring "glory hunter."
