We should have retained his services following his ban.
Printable View
We should have retained his services following his ban.
And what kind of message would that have sent to the fans, if it turned out be true?
These rumours get up my nose.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/56030434
https://www.skysports.com/football/n...ne-last-season
It is good to know the real story, after months of speculation. Whether the club were right to sack him or not - whether based on his state of mind after the test fail or on performance, financial or 'moral' considerations - we will find out in the next few months. If he rips up the league for Boro it will look like a bad decision in hindsight. If he fails to get back to his best of 3 years ago it may look like a sensible move.
Whatever, the decision was made and it is in the past.
having read the article I can't see what he has done that is supposed to be wrong
Disagree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanmore Bluebird
Also do not know if was his first time.
I presume your joking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
Didnt Chelsea sue a former player after losing a transfer fee after a player was banned for drug use.
Failed a drug test perhaps:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
Adrian Mutu, I thinkQuote:
Originally Posted by Hilts
Yeah thats him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gnojek
Rubbish. Apart from anything else, it was ‘in competition’. What sort of example was he setting to all our young fans ? The correct thing was to get rid.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stanmore Bluebird
**** him and his sob story. People in a lot worse position than him who got drug and addiction problems.
Boo ****ing hoo.
"Nathaniel Mendez-Laing says he wants to "leave the past behind" after serving a suspension for cocaine use."Quote:
Originally Posted by Feedback
"The Football Association (FA) has revealed the 28-year-old served a three-month ban after a positive drugs test administered on 4 July, 2020."
"The FA said the now Middlesbrough wing admitted taking cocaine "in a context unrelated to sporting performance.""
Probably the cocaine use
no, I'm serious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hilts
If its good enough for queen Victoria then it's good enough for meQuote:
Originally Posted by City123
I don’t know where NML figured in the list of highest paid City players but it wouldn’t surprise me if getting him off the payroll to save money was the main motivation in terminating his contract. NML, of course, providing the club with cast iron means to do it. In these difficult times and no parachute payment next season there may well be more.
Not his first offence. Would also explain his absence in early part of last season. Clearly NML has had a problem. All the info is in the details of the judgement.
https://twitter.com/FAspokesperson/s...252288516?s=19
A professional athlete getting banned twice in less than a year for using recreational drugs is pretty special.
I kind of agree but we don't know the full story, was this the final straw after many chances. Footballers have come back from much worse. Could have offered him help and support, but as I say, the club could have already done that many timesQuote:
Originally Posted by Stanmore Bluebird
Admitted to doing it 10pm the night before we played Bristol City in July. Also banned earlier in the season for 3 months
And people are saying we shouldn’t have sacked him.
Should have sold him the first occasion
I hope he considers using his influence, when he's ready, to help others make better decisions rather than just moving on completely.Quote:
I appreciate all the support I have been given throughout. I now want to leave that period of my life in the past where it belongs.
His sample showed metabolites of cocaine on 09/12/2019 (provisionally suspended on 07/02/2020, formally suspended on 21/04/2020 and 3months were backdated to provisional date) and 04/07/2020. That may help explain why club dismissed him.
So that explains his absence from December 2019 until the suspension of football due to the pandemic.
So with two 3 month suspensions in 8 months I'm not surprised he was sacked.
However, as it was a second offence his ban may have been for much longer had Wada not moved the goalposts in January and specified a three month ban for recreational use so when the club made their decision to sack him it was highly likely he could have been banned for the remainder of his contract.
I wonder if the club are considering the Chelsea/Adrian Mutu route to get compensation for his subsequent speedy return to football.
They shouldQuote:
Originally Posted by PontBlue
Wasn’t he sacked by Peterborough for a breach of contract??
Personally I think the club were right for sacking him..don’t think he gave them much choice
I find it amusing that so many posters can be so dogmatic and pass judgement about some issues when they aren't aware of the facts behind the scenes.Quote:
Originally Posted by SunderlandBluebird
The club were spot on.
You have to wonder if we had a big asset on a longer contract if they would have stood by him. Not to say that makes it right or wrong but I think them sacking him also has to consider his length of contract.
It's pretty pathetic he can't stay off it long enough to play a game.
People are are very strange when it comes to football , they can be accepting of poor behaviours , compared to bad behaviours in other roles in life .Quote:
Originally Posted by SunderlandBluebird
If this were a normal member of the public with drug abuse problems I think people would be more sympathetic. Just because he's a rich footballer doesn't change the fact that addiction doesn't discriminate.Quote:
Originally Posted by 2b2bdoo
Bloke's a ****
:thumbup: it is a massive problem whoever you are.Quote:
Originally Posted by UNDERHILL1927
And a poor example to younger players who may have viewed his behaviour accepting if we had kept him on the books . He has broken the law .Quote:
Originally Posted by kendoddsdadsdogsdead
Played 66 minutes in 1-0 win against Bristol City the day after and scored a 7/10 in the Wales online player ratings.
If he has any issues, then I am sympathetic. However, considering he had 2 chances, and another one by signing to Boro, is very lucky. If someone in other jobs, say for example those needing DBS, get caught then it's their career over.
As a footballer, he should know better. As I said, he had 2 chances and he should be keeping his body in top shape.
Would you care about the ‘behind the scenes’ if he was a policeman who had been kicked out from the force, or a surgeon being struck off for turning up to work after a line?Quote:
Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie
Some jobs you have to be above that. I think football is one of them.
Exactly!Quote:
Originally Posted by WJ99mobile
I'm a bit surprised by TBG's reply. He took cocain by choice after previously being caught. He takes full responsibility for his actions.
Good riddance to him!
This kind of comment could be the death of the message board .Quote:
Originally Posted by Taunton Blue Genie
Thankfully the stupid people dont realise they are stupid.
Of course there should be accountability.
But you need all the facts.
How come ex City player Yorwerth had a 4 year footballing ban for running from a drugs test, but Mendez who got caught twice in 8/9 months gets short term bans?
I should have made clear that I was referring to those who were criticising the club before these facts came to light. Apols for the confusion.Quote:
Originally Posted by WJ99mobile