Mutu - has to pay fine to Chelsea

[SkippyjonJones]

you are a druggie and you are fired...

 

and can we have the equivilant of the transfer fee back please.

 

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/t...sea/8178248.stm

[Tones]

Can they force him to pay it or can he be banned from Football if he doesnt pay?

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

I'd tell to feck right off

[Tones]

  Macca said:

I'd tell to feck right off

 

i think he will. Cant see him paying that sort of money out.

[mick]

It sets a precedent for big money players.

 

In theory if Ronaldo breached his contract at Real after a few months they could than order him to pay them a mere €75 million?!

[Tones]

Their own fault for sacking him instead of trying to help him then using him or selling him. What did they think when they sacked him, that he would just never play for any other team?

[Cam]

  t1971 said:

Their own fault for sacking him instead of trying to help him then using him or selling him.

Surely as an athlete taking drugs ought to constitute gross misconduct.

 

Glad they had the balls to fire him rather than palm him off on to someone else.

[realtarragona]

That's one expensive line

[growler]

pains me to say this, but I side with chelsea sacking him. this decision will hopefully make players think twice.

[Stevie H]

if chelsea used employment law to fire him then why does he have to pay them money? that's not standard employment law is it? chelsea can f*** off anyway.

[Rimbeux]

This has to be so, much as Chelsea cocked up the procedure, but to be otherwise would effectively make sacking players a non-starter. We've seen it with Barton, clubs have had to keep him or face losing money.

[Herbie von Smalls]

  Cam said:

Surely as an athlete taking drugs ought to constitute gross misconduct.

 

Glad they had the balls to fire him rather than palm him off on to someone else.

is there not an employer's duty of care?

[Tones]

  Cam said:

Surely as an athlete taking drugs ought to constitute gross misconduct.

 

Glad they had the balls to fire him rather than palm him off on to someone else.

 

Fair enough, but did they honestly expect him to just retire from football? They sacked him so he should have been free to go to whoever was willing to take a risk on him or help him out. Chelsea did neither.

[Falconhoof]

Should everyone who takes a recreational drug, presumably outside of work hours, be sacked ?

Why should footballers even be tested for cocaine use when, for example, Police Officers or surgeons are not tested for such a drug ?

[John am Rhein]

  Ernest Blenkinsop said:

Should everyone who takes a recreational drug, presumably outside of work hours, be sacked ?

Why should footballers even be tested for cocaine use when, for example, Police Officers or surgeons are not tested for such a drug ?

 

Are police officers and surgeons tested for other drugs?

[Falconhoof]

  John am Rhein said:

Are police officers and surgeons tested for other drugs?

I don't know but why should these drugs be within the remit of drugs testing for sports people? The testing regime is there to stop people cheating by taking performance enhancing drugs. You can't cheat by doing coke.

[growler]

maybe not performance enhancing, but it does affect the performance, and thats what it is about. Also, footballers are role models and should be held to a higher standard. You can't tell me that footballers are naive to the fact they have a public image, and kids look up to them. If they can't handle that, get out of the game.

 

Football clubs have a duty to help young kids deal with the fame and fortune that comes with the game, but if you look around at the kids in the game, the stupid are far less now than 5-10 years ago. The sport is a lot more professional and held to a higher standard.

[Tones]

Still say Chelsea handled it badly. So what happens if he refuses to pay it? Can he be banned?

[Falconhoof]

  growler said:

maybe not performance enhancing, but it does affect the performance, and thats what it is about.

 

 

Is it ? Maybe players who smoke and players who drink a skinfull on a Saturday night after a game should all be sacked then.

[Leo No.8]

Sack Parry?

 

Shame we didn't get old Rick on the beak a few years ago, he'd have been replaced by the far superior Purslow or someone of his ilk years ago and we'd have about 23 titles now.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

  Ernest Blenkinsop said:

I don't know but why should these drugs be within the remit of drugs testing for sports people? The testing regime is there to stop people cheating by taking performance enhancing drugs. You can't cheat by doing coke.

If coke ts as a masking agentm you can. Hence why you get in bother for a range of over the counter cough medicines etc. See Sheff U's keeper

[Tones]

Always wondered why players get bans for smoking weed. Obviously it is illegal but its most certainly not performance enhancing.

[Sir Tokyo Sexwale]

1 - it's illegal

2 - it may be a mask - I dunno whether it is or not

[_00_deathscar]

  Leo No.8 said:

Sack Parry?

 

Shame we didn't get old Rick on the beak a few years ago, he'd have been replaced by the far superior Purslow or someone of his ilk years ago and we'd have about 23 titles now.

 

Just the 23? SACK PURSLOW!

[Falconhoof]

  Macca said:

1 - it's illegal

2 - it may be a mask - I dunno whether it is or not

 

1- should all breaches of the criminal law be met with sacking ? If not, why specifically this one ?

2 - first i've heard of this.