Chelsea have done what in my opinion is right and sacked Adrian Mutu. Any sportsman or woman who is caught taking drugs should have a life time ban, let's hope the FA are strong enough to do the right thing too. What do you think?

I'm inclined to agree and Rio Ferdinand should have got at least a 3 year ban.

About time! what a complete t***er! What kind of message is that giving out to kids? . . almost as bad as being a Sheff Utd fan.

Some of you people are so backwards it's unreal. It's like watching trisha with you lot.

Originally posted by Agent Gypo
Some of you people are so backwards it's unreal. It's like watching trisha with you lot.

explain yourself:D :D :D

Originally posted by panda79
explain yourself:D :D :D

il explain for him



Originally posted by Lickszz
I'm inclined to agree and Rio Ferdinand should have got at least a 3 year ban.

hmmmmm why should he? he failed a drugs test, something which he took 24 hours later testing NEGATIVE


Originally posted by Lestat
About time! what a complete t***er! What kind of message is that giving out to kids? . . almost as bad as being a Sheff Utd fan.

Even on a thread relating to chelsea/mutu, there is always one WEDNESDAY fan that has to bring up some comparison to united!!

Originally posted by Robbie_Lovin
il explain for him





hmmmmm why should he? he failed a drugs test, something which he took 24 hours later testing NEGATIVE




Even on a thread relating to chelsea/mutu, there is always one WEDNESDAY fan that has to bring up some comparison to united!!

i dont think it had anything to do with that you know

Originally posted by Robbie_Lovin
[B]il explain for him

hmmmmm why should he? he failed a drugs test, something which he took 24 hours later testing NEGATIVE


Ferdinand deliberately dodged a drug test. Any other sport and he would not have been getting off so lightly with an 8 months punishment.

15-16 million down the swanny!.
I wonder if Abramovich will even notice?

Can't fault Chelsea at all here. IMO this is Integrity with a capital 'I'

Now it has come to light that Chelsea themselves requested that the player be tested, I wonder if any of the other giant clubs would have been so noble? Going by recent history probably not.

Hopefully this young sniffer will be handed a severe ban.

Originally posted by Lickszz
I'm inclined to agree and Rio Ferdinand should have got at least a 3 year ban.

he wasn't proven to have taken drugs, hence why he didn't turn up for the test :P

On a similar note, I always thought it was a bit shady how another foreign Man Utd player made a swift exit out of the club. :suspect: :o ;)

Originally posted by Lickszz
On a similar note, I always thought it was a bit shady how another foreign Man Utd player made a swift exit out of the club. :suspect: :o ;)

I agree! very :suspect:. He was just about the best defender in the country at the time.

Originally posted by Lickszz
Ferdinand deliberately dodged a drug test. Any other sport and he would not have been getting off so lightly with an 8 months punishment.

people forget things,
it was not all his fault, yes he should have taken the test that day, and no there is no excuse for him not doing so, but he should not have been allowed tom leave the training ground

anyways as for mutu
maximum 2 years ban for him, but it looks like he will get 6 months

I don't condone what Mutu did, and I'm not making excuses for him, but I think Chelsea's decision to boot him out had little to do with him snorting cocaine.

Many footballers have done far worse, and been backed to the hilt by their clubs. Lickszz provided the example of Man Utd and Rio Ferdinand, and let's not forget Woodgate and Bowyer at Leeds.

And, of course, Chelsea's own assistant coach Graham Rix who was found guilty of under age sex with a 15 year old.

I've read reports that was a clash of personalities 'tween Mutu and the Chelsea manager, so I'm inclined to believe snorting coke was the perfect excuse to get rid.

Remember folks, before you hit that reply button to shoot me down in flames, please reread my first paragraph.

Maybe we should bring in drug testing for all jobs, and everyone that takes drugs can be out of work... oh wait... then we'd have about 25% unemployment... gosh... then maybe we should try and help the people who can't cope with a life without drugs, or just accept that people make mistakes every now and again... hmmm...

Originally posted by Lickszz
On a similar note, I always thought it was a bit shady how another foreign Man Utd player made a swift exit out of the club. :suspect: :o ;)

I'm not saying you're completely wrong, but he did bring out his autobiography slating Ferguson. I don't think any manager would let that go!

abdul, if you read the full reports on why he was booted, it was not just because of the rift he had with manager and snorting cocaine!!

He excluded himself from the group many times


here is what mourinho had to say about it

''The thing that concerns me most is that this is his private life,'' said Mourinho. ''Players for big teams have a very big responsibility.

''I can imagine how disappointed thousands of Romanian kids are. Adrian is the best player in Romania, he is their captain, their star.

''Thousands of kids are in love with him. He has a big responsibility to them. His situation is not easy. He has personal problems.

''But now it is finished between us. Even if he comes back to football I wouldn't sign him.

''Not just because of the drugs but because he called me a liar.''

Mourinho continued to reveal that he had major concerns over Mutu's private life since the moment he arrived at Stamford Bridge and that he even challenged the forward on the first day of training in pre-season.

''When I met Mutu on his first day in pre-season, he was with his agents, Mr Becali and Mr Popescu. I told them 'I have information you are on cocaine','' continued Mourinho.

''All three laughed and denied it. They said it was all a big lie and maybe there are lies about him because last season he behaved strangely at the club and in his social life.

''After that, I didn't speak with him again because they denied the situation.

''But for a long time, we felt now and again he was behaving strangely. Sometimes he was happy, sometimes not so.

''Sometimes he was involved with the group, sometimes isolated.

''He arrived late a few times and other times didn't come in at all. He was also injured when nobody knows when and how.

''These were strange things. We spoke about it at the club.

''Was he pushing us to let him go in the transfer window? Did he want to start a conflict and go to another place? Or is he involved in other things? Questions were starting to be asked.''

Mourinho's doubt over his player's alleged playboy lifestyle convinced him to bring in drug testers, in a move that confirmed his worst suspicions.

''We didn't speak much about his future. It was more for him to hear what we had to say rather than to meet,'' he said.

''Everybody was involved in the decision. Every decision made by my club, I support.

''The club bought him to play football. At this moment, he has been out of competition for a long period.

''The first one to break the relation was the player. He cannot complain and the club cannot be painted as the guilty party.

"We did everything to give him a good professional life. As he admitted in some interviews, it has been a personal problem for a long period. It is his fault.

''He is human, a young man, his life must now go in the right direction.

''The statement from the club is very clear. We have a code of conduct and drugs were included in a very specific way.

''It's the best way to show we mean business.''



i think even if he had not had a rift with mourinho, he would still be out of the club to be honest!!!

man utd did not get rid of ferdinand as they could not afford to replace him, and there is very litttle out there better thn him!!

chelsea are a team above anyone, and nobody is indispensible

Thanks for your response Robbie_Lovin; I found it an interesting read.

However, all of Mourinho's comments and your final sentence:

chelsea are a team above anyone, and nobody is indispensible

...don't explain why Chelsea were supportive of assistant coach and convicted paedophile Graham Rix :suspect:

Originally posted by Abdul
Thanks for your response Robbie_Lovin; I found it an interesting read.

However, all of Mourinho's comments and your final sentence:



...don't explain why Chelsea were supportive of assistant coach and convicted paedophile Graham Rix :suspect:


is he still down there??

anyways.... that was pre-abromavich i suppose!!

but yeah abdul, agreed you have a good point there!!

Originally posted by Robbie_Lovin
people forget things,
it was not all his fault, yes he should have taken the test that day, and no there is no excuse for him not doing so, but he should not have been allowed tom leave the training ground


Yes, but he is the one who carries the can. He should exercise personal responsibility. He shouldn't need babysitting, he is supposed to be a grown man. These tests are serious stuff and Ferdinand must have been aware how serious they are.

Originally posted by Abdul
I don't condone what Mutu did, and I'm not making excuses for him, but I think Chelsea's decision to boot him out had little to do with him snorting cocaine.

Many footballers have done far worse, and been backed to the hilt by their clubs. Lickszz provided the example of Man Utd and Rio Ferdinand, and let's not forget Woodgate and Bowyer at Leeds.

And, of course, Chelsea's own assistant coach Graham Rix who was found guilty of under age sex with a 15 year old.

I've read reports that was a clash of personalities 'tween Mutu and the Chelsea manager, so I'm inclined to believe snorting coke was the perfect excuse to get rid.


Arsenal backed Adams and Merson. However, in this day and age drugs in sport are getting lots of attention and the emphasis is on making people aware that it will not be tolerated and are not acceptable within sport.

Chelsea have stated that they adopt Zero tolerance regarding drugs, may be they don't have the same policy regarding sex offenses. I obviously think they should but that's another story.

Originally posted by Lickszz
Yes, but he is the one who carries the can. He should exercise personal responsibility. He shouldn't need babysitting, he is supposed to be a grown man. These tests are serious stuff and Ferdinand must have been aware how serious they are.

Fair enough lickszz, there is no denying that at all!!

but to ban him for 3 years like you said should happen is a bit far fetched!! 8 months was harsh, in comparison to some players,

it is being touted round that Mutu may only receive a 6 month ban for actually taking drugs!!

as was the case in italy, when a player took drugs over there and was subsequently banned for 6 months!!

The FA wanted to make a stance on drugs regarding Rio, all because he was a big name player!!
i hate man utd, and really im not much of a fan of Rio to be honest, and in no way do i condone his actions RE missing drugs tests, but to be banned for 8 months for only a minor mistake is a bit harsh! But i suppose it works, as he wont do it again in the future, and i cant see any other players doing it either!!

Originally posted by bigrods
I'm not saying you're completely wrong, but he did bring out his autobiography slating Ferguson. I don't think any manager would let that go!

You do have a point. Ferguson is well known for ruling the roost and doesn't take kidly to this been questioned/compromised. He's ruthless to say the least.

It's just that he goes to Lazio and then he ends up testing positive. The move itself happened very quickly. The book had only just been released and prior to this Man Utd had stated they knew nothing about it. This makes me wonder.

Originally posted by Robbie_Lovin
Fair enough lickszz, there is no denying that at all!!

but to ban him for 3 years like you said should happen is a bit far fetched!! 8 months was harsh, in comparison to some players,

it is being touted round that Mutu may only receive a 6 month ban for actually taking drugs!!

as was the case in italy, when a player took drugs over there and was subsequently banned for 6 months!!

The FA wanted to make a stance on drugs regarding Rio, all because he was a big name player!!
i hate man utd, and really im not much of a fan of Rio to be honest, and in no way do i condone his actions RE missing drugs tests, but to be banned for 8 months for only a minor mistake is a bit harsh! But i suppose it works, as he wont do it again in the future, and i cant see any other players doing it either!!

The 3 year ban is just a random comparison to other sports which are not so lenient. I don't see why football should be an exception.

Some may see it has a mistake and other may see it has stalling for time. I do agree that there needs to be consistency across the board.

I make reference to Negoui.

As you might realize I feel that by failing to turn up for a drugs test should result in a ban and not just a fine if it is to have any impact.

At the time of his incident Negoui was injured and not playing but just in light training. I have heard that apparently he didn't exactly forget to attend.

His mother was flying in from overseas to Liverpool airport and Christian had already arranged with the club that he could leave and go and collect her. Both he and the club believed he would be back in time for the test, however the flight was delayed by several hours and by the time he got back to the ground the drug testers had been and gone. He got in touch and the testers couldn't come back then, but returned and tested 24 hours later

The circumstances are slightly different but I still think if he knew he was to be tested that day he should have arranged for someone else to collect his mum.

We either fully support drugs testing in the game and give a fitting punishment for those who don't comply or simply withdraw the tests and let those who wish to indulge get on with it.

excuses are not an option because they create a Grey area for people to exploit!

Everyone it seems is to blame....apart from Mutu, well according to Mutu it's Chelsea who have ruined his career, is he real or what! He took the drug, He tested positive, HE is the one who made the decision to stick it up his nose, he and he alone is responsible.
For my three pennorth anyone testing positive for drugs should be banned sine die.
No arguments or smart lawyers, the message would soon get through that sport must be drug free.

Read Mutu and his thoughts here
http://www.eurosport.com/home/pages/v4/l0/s22/e6876/sport_lng0_spo22_evt6876_sto653068.shtml

Chelsea were absolutely right to sack him, but they sacked him because they weighed up the financial implications and the implications to the team and decided it was the best option.

Could you imagine they would have done the same if it was Lampard or Terry? No - they would say he's a just a young man and we should forgive him making a youthful mistake.

You might say that would any one of us put up with drug tests in our day to day life. But sport is very different. You probably wouldn't say Ben Johnson should have got a Gold medal because none of us have to have drug tests in our day to day life. (Well, actually Carl Lewis and Linford Christie were probably on something as well in that race........but thats a different matter)

Mutu has been banned for 7 months which is less that Rio ferdinand got for not taking drugs.
Funny old game as some washed up old alkie used to say

I think the reason is Mutu admitted his guilt, said he would not appeal and agreed to undergo counselling.

Rio Ferdinand and Man U denied that they had done anything wrong, and fought tooth and nail to try and get off scot free.

You have to be punished for failing to give a drug test. I know I brought up Ben Johnson before, but what if he said he wasn't going to give a sample after he had won the olympic final?

The lads been bad I agree with all the above posts but I just think it's strange that he has a very public row with the boss then a week later he is found to be cramming charlie up his hooter. Just food for thought.
Cheers

Originally posted by stoatboy
The lads been bad I agree with all the above posts but I just think it's strange that he has a very public row with the boss then a week later he is found to be cramming charlie up his hooter. Just food for thought.
Cheers


if you read the reports it seems it has been going on for a long long time!!

mourinho ordered the drug test because of this

If Mourinho wanted to get rid of him, surely he could have persuaded some club to give him a few million for him next transfer window?

I think its quite funny now that Chelsea are quoted as saying his ban was too lenient. More like they are kicking themselves for sacking him when they could have got their money back selling him on at the end of the season (or even in the transfer window)

Originally posted by Yodameister
If Mourinho wanted to get rid of him, surely he could have persuaded some club to give him a few million for him next transfer window?

I think its quite funny now that Chelsea are quoted as saying his ban was too lenient. More like they are kicking themselves for sacking him when they could have got their money back selling him on at the end of the season (or even in the transfer window)

i dont think it really effects chelsea all that much to be honest, due to the fact his form has not been very good, he has tested positive for drugs, and a well known bad egg now!!

all this accumulated they would prob get around 4 million for him!

now nobody would be willing to buy a player in transfer window who is not going to be able to play for them this season,
so it would not be till summer they sold him, say in that time his wages accumulated 3 million possibly??

and then there is no guarantee in seling him,

chelsea know they did the right thing

The point I'm making is that Chelsea are acting in their own self interest and have very little interest in the welfare of Mutu, the good of the game, and the reputation of English football.

The actual finances of the situation I don't know all the ins and outs of.

Originally posted by Yodameister
The point I'm making is that Chelsea are acting in their own self interest and have very little interest in the welfare of Mutu, the good of the game, and the reputation of English football.

The actual finances of the situation I don't know all the ins and outs of.


why would they have any interest the welfare of mutu as he cleary does not bother about his own welfare, if he did then he would not have taken any banned substances, whether it enhances his game or not!!

good of the game? they are making a stance in that drugs are not tolerated, and now that is being echoed round, it will probably do more good than anything else for them kicking him out!!

Well, employers have something called "duty of care" to their employees. I know football is not exactly the same as other jobs, but they are covered by the same laws.

I'm not saying sacking him is not for the good of the game, I am saying it is not their motivation for doing it.

Originally posted by Yodameister
Well, employers have something called "duty of care" to their employees. I know football is not exactly the same as other jobs, but they are covered by the same laws.



ok lets look at it a different way!!

an employee is found to be on cocaine whilst working??

they investiagte this, and if found to be correct, they would then sack said person for gross misconduct (could effect the companys name if found out)

now just because this is a football player and he did it while lets say "not working" its a different matter, but the difference between a football player and a "normal" worker is that, they are expected to keep a good name from themselves, stay off drugs etc!!

chelsea did the right thing about this, whatever there reasons behind sacking him was, he deserved to lose his "job" no matter what anyone else says, its gross misconduct!

it gave chelsea a bad name, also, if they had not sacked him, they would have had to carry on paying his wages till the suspension was over, as the case is that if they did not, he would have to give notice that he was not receiving wages, and could walk out on them for free anyways!!

so why should chelsea have to pay wages for a player that has discredited there name?

I'm talking generally, you are talking specifics.

Consider this:
Mutu gets caught. The FA give him a huge fine and a 6 match ban for bringing the game into disrepute. Mutu happens to be on top form at the time and is one of the teams most popular and best players.

Do you reckon Chelsea still sack him for gross misconduct?

I can't beleiev the answer would be anything but "no", and I would perfectly understand the reasons (I wouldn't think it was right though - I think they did the right thing, I am just a little cynical about their motivation)

i know what you're saying yoda,

mourinho actually talked to his advisors previously regarding a possible drug problem, and to have chat about it.
But they apparently just laughed at such suggestions!

Now fair enough, mutu had a dispute with mourinho and this was probably the catalyst due to the decision behind him ordering a drug test to be done!

Now, mourinho was worried because he could see potential in a player who he thought was alienating himself at certain times and acting strange, and thats why he tried talking to his advisors!

He could not get through that way, his form had dipped, and he was not being the player that chelsea expect to be of him!

Everyone states the dispute was origionally started from mutu not being able to link up with his national team, but i really don't think that is the case, as they let everyone else go on international duty, so why complain at mutu,
they even allowed keman to go over, when they had stated he was unjured, but yugoslavia wanted to check this, he went over and sent him back as he was actually injured,
so i believe that if chelsea stated mutu was injured then he would have been.
so this leads me to the conclusion that there was something behind the arguements which had gone off with mutu and mourinho

ie drugs

now possibly, if this was terry, and he got such ban, they may not have sacked him, but i dont think we will ever find out whether that is true!!

you look back a few seasons when they sacked bosnich, another player who was not in form though, even with this in hand, he was still a good goalkeeper, and they sacked him for the same offence, so i suppose they are showing a little consistency even if it they dont show strictness with sex offenders

He's been fined £13 million today.

Whilst I agree what he did was wrong, I think that's perhaps a little high?

Ok, so Chelsea lost the money they had invested in him (£15 million) but he only got a 7 month ban - if they had kept him on they could have sold him after that for some money - it's only because the sacked him they lost everything.

Personally I think fining him what will amount to most of his career earnings is too harsh.