You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
We should walk out.
- Thread starter mammutly
- Start date
Mad Eyed Screamer
Moderator
Citizen52 said:He won't play. No offence but it's not even worth debating.
I will sell my three houses if he plays.
I will raise you my four houses and 3 cars.
EalingBlue2
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 7 Aug 2007
- Messages
- 5,571
Don't get some of the thinking here, if he apologises, knuckles down, gets his form, earns a place on the bench and comes on that would be 100% proof that the club is bigger and that he has fallen in to line and bowed to Mancini. So it would be the exact opposite of what people are saying.
Mad Eyed Screamer said:Citizen52 said:He won't play. No offence but it's not even worth debating.
I will sell my three houses if he plays.
I will raise you my four houses and 3 cars.
Which one of you is Carlos, and which one of you is Blobby Fowler?
nashark said:Didn't Scholes refuse to play for United?
True, but when he did it over 10 years ago(he refused to be sub, the public found out about it after he retired), we all saw Tevez with our own eyes after 12 months of disrespecting OUR club and fans, then he addmitted it but later after being coached by Kia changed his tune and started to blame Bobby. Not the same thing!
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
Beswick Prize Bands Big Drum said:You will not be walking out on Tevez you would be walking out on Manchester City Football Club, it a stupid idea
Exactly.
cleavers said:Who the f**k cares ? He's never played for us.nashark said:Didn't Scholes refuse to play for United?
Had this been handled differently in effect preventing the media from destroying all middle ground, we might have come to hold Tevez in the same regard as United fans hold Scholes.
Tevez is a difficult character. He doesn't enjoy playing football. He's reached the stage where he cares very little about money. I imagine he'd prefer to just live a comfortable live with his family rather than strain his body every year, doing a job he doesn't need to do and doesn't enjoy. So when we convinced him to stay, we probably framed it in such terms that appealed to his loyalty and his ego. In other words, 'please stay for one more year Carlos, we really need you'. When it turned out that we didn't need him and when his advisor's corrupting him, telling him to move to another club, his reaction was not unexpected (but by no means acceptable).
It's regrettable that it's come to this stage, but here we are. Were we to have played this the way we handled Mario's 'allergy' and kept it in-house, we could have punished him with a big fine and resolved our differences in private. We'd still be showing our players that the club is bigger than any one person, but we'd also not be knocking £20 million off his transfer fee and we'd still have a world-class player to pick from. However, in handling this situation in front of the world, Mancini has got his man but imo, we lose out.
beano46
Well-Known Member
If it did happen (which it won't) I will not acknowledge his presence, if he scores and I happen to be stood up I will simply sit down and remain silent, if I'm already seated I will remain seated.
beano46 said:If it did happen (which it won't) I will not acknowledge his presence, if he scores and I happen to be stood up I will simply sit down and remain silent, if I'm already seated I will remain seated.
This but I'll boo the tosser first
citysince88
Well-Known Member
No, keeping stum if he scored sounds a better idea to me, remember there are 10 other players that need supporting on the pitch.