Home› General Chat
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options

mutu gets 7 month ban and fine

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
edited January 2023 in General Chat
Adrian Mutu has been given a seven-month ban and a £20,000 fine for failing a drugs test.

read the rest

here
Post edited by JustV on

Comments

  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    About fair, I reckon.

    No doubt the morons over in Trafford will be whingeing about Ferdinand again though.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Kermit
    About fair, I reckon.

    No doubt the morons over in Trafford will be whingeing about Ferdinand again though.

    lol probably
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I was wrong.

    It was the morons down the King's Road who started whingeing first.

    kenyon is a cunt.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Why do they care? Haven't they just sacked him?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Aladdin
    Why do they care? Haven't they just sacked him?

    Yup they did. In fact they sacked him before the fa even had a hearing over it :rolleyes:

    Though apparently 4 clubs are after Mutu already with 2 of them reportedly english clubs

    I wouldnt mind him coming to the Gunners tbh
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    My bets are on him ending up at Tottenham. Think the punishment should of been a bit more harsh to be honest.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by spartaalbion
    My bets are on him ending up at Tottenham. Think the punishment should of been a bit more harsh to be honest.
    At first I thought the same, thinking the FA have to give him a longer ban than Ferdinand. Then I read an article somewhere which changed my mind because it was a logical explanation as to why they have to ban him for less than Ferdinand. If they had given him a longer ban than Rio then players using drugs would miss tests rather than being found out. This sounds very logical to me so I think 7 months is what they had to give him. Chelsea losing out on over £15million, is quite funny because they don't seem bothered, small back pocket change for Arbramovich.
  • Options
    JsTJsT Posts: 18,268 Skive's The Limit
    Going to Spurs is a punishment isn't it?

    Although today's Metro suggests Chelsea are ready to sue Mutu for lost transfer revenue. You shouldn't have sacked him should you moron?!?!!?
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    The are going to sue him for damages because of his breach of contract. It will be interesting to see if they have a leg to stand on; I wouldn't have thought so.

    He won't go to Tottenham if the comments attributed to Arsene Wenger are accurate.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Kermit
    No doubt the morons over in Trafford will be whingeing about Ferdinand again though.

    :wave:

    I'm going to have a bit of a whinge. Although I do agree, in part, with what the Leeds scummer has said.

    There would be a disincentive to take the test, if a player thought that he would get a shorter ban by not taking the test, than by testing positive. But that argument misses an important point. Rio did take a test which came through clear. That was part of the reason he *only* got eight months.

    Here we have a player who failed a test, denied that he had taken anything. Then in a cynical PR exercise admitted it and tried to portray himself as a victim.

    Now we can go down the whole "recreational" issue, but there isn't a difference. Drugs affect the brains function, it doesn't matter how you describe then - recreational/performance enhancing - that is their function. So whatever drug is taken it will affact performance.

    Mutu is guilty of a serious offence. Just like Stam was, Davids and numerous others.

    FIFA says that it wants a tough stance and yet the biggest ban we have seen recently isn't for taking "performance enhancing" drugs, nor for Mutu. But for a player missing a test.

    Sounds like a screwy world to me...
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Man Of Kent
    I'm going to have a bit of a whinge. Although I do agree, in part, with what the Leeds scummer has said.
    Why thankyou, you are so kind :p
    Now we can go down the whole "recreational" issue, but there isn't a difference. Drugs affect the brains function, it doesn't matter how you describe then - recreational/performance enhancing - that is their function. So whatever drug is taken it will affact performance.
    I kinda agree but not fully. There is a massive difference between performance enhancing and recreational drugs. Yes they do affect the brains function and they will both affect performance, BUT performance enhancing will affect performance positively whilst recreational will no doubt have an entirely opposite affect.
    I've tried playing football the night after taking coke and I was dreadfull, my head was in bits and I couldn't concentrate on the game. I've tried playing football coming straight from a party where I'd had numurous pills and once again I had a nightmare and the ball just bounced off me everytime I got near it. A lot of my team smoke skunk before games but if I have a joint before a game it just kills me, especially first thing sunday morning.
    So although I agree it affects performance it affects it imo in a bad way and Mutu will never have had an advantage if he'd being snorting coke the night before, he would no doubt being nowhere near as good a player as he has proved to be in the past.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Man Of Kent
    There would be a disincentive to take the test, if a player thought that he would get a shorter ban by not taking the test, than by testing positive. But that argument misses an important point. Rio did take a test which came through clear. That was part of the reason he *only* got eight months.

    And how long does cocaine stay in the bloodstream?

    It's very easy to "forget" to take a test then take one a week later and it "prove" that you were clean when you were not.

    FIFA says that it wants a tough stance and yet the biggest ban we have seen recently isn't for taking "performance enhancing" drugs, nor for Mutu. But for a player missing a test.

    Bosnich. Nine months.
  • Options
    Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Originally posted by Lickalotapuss
    So although I agree it affects performance it affects it imo in a bad way and Mutu will never have had an advantage if he'd being snorting coke the night before, he would no doubt being nowhere near as good a player as he has proved to be in the past.

    Well that's why Chelsea called the test- Mutu wasn't training properly.
Sign In or Register to comment.