Double blow for Mutu

sharkman

From ITV Football

Shamed Chelsea striker Adrian Mutu is reported to have been charged by the Football Association and suspended by the club.

According to reports in The Sun, the 25-year-old Romanian captain has been charged with taking a banned substance after failing a random drug test last month.

Mutu originally admitted to taking cocaine, but later claimed he'd taken a substance that would help improve his sexual performance.

He has also agreed to undergo counselling sessions as part of a rehabilitation programme in a bid to escape a long-term ban from the game.

Following the FA's move, Chelsea are alleged to have suspended the player, who earns around £60 000-a-week, pending the outcome of a hearing. No date has yet been set for the hearing but Mutu could get a ban anywhere between six months and two years.

The FA could also choose to impose a lengthy rehabilitation instead of an outright, ban but that is unlikely given the sport's crackdown on the use of drugs.

Mutu has not started a Premiership match all season and Chelsea's suspension, if confirmed, will suggest that manager Jose Mourinho wants rid of the player they signed for £15.8million from Parma.

Mutu failed a random drug test carried out by UK Sport last month and earlier this week Sports Minister Richard Caborn called for the player to be hit with a two-year ban in line with the World Anti-Doping Agency's disciplinary code.

The Romanian has a reputation for living a playboy lifestyle and has been involved in sex scandals, and car chases with police back home.

He also fell out with Mourinho over his decision to play for his country against the Czech Republic in their recent World Cup qualifier. Mourinho told the Romanians that Mutu was unfit but the player defied his club and played the full 90 minutes.

He was fined two weeks wages on his return to England and the player claimed he almost hit Mourinho during a stormy meeting - an allegation denied by the Chelsea boss.

Mossy Monk

no ****ing harm

throw the book at him

Big Nelly

AFter wat happened with Ferdinand there is no way that he is going to get off lightly! 2 year ban at least

sharkman

Big Nelly wrote:

AFter wat happened with Ferdinand there is no way that he is going to get off lightly! 2 year ban at least

True , I can see them making an example of him !

Third_Echelon

Would you get suspended from working for 2 years if you took cocaine?

I think not. This is a social drug, not a performance enhancing drug... personally i think he shouldn't be banned from playing. This was his lifestyle choice. Fair enough if it interferes with his ability to carry out his work, then the company (chelsea) has the right to repremand the player... not the FA...

ZENER

I'll bet my hat they give him only a few months if any ban at all:

Because it was recreational drugs and not enhancing drugs.
Because he will plead addiction and promise to get counseling and be a good boy.
Because he doesn't play for England or Man United.

ZEN

sharkman

ZENER wrote:

Because he doesn't play for England or Man United.ZEN

Thats probably the one !

Big Nelly

Third_Echelon wrote:

Would you get suspended from working for 2 years if you took cocaine?

Not sure who you work wit but I think most people would probably be sacked! not saying that people dont but they have to be caught! sure Mutu was taki the piss! out all the time! never at training! doing what he liked and not preforming! also didnt I hear somewhere he took it because someone said he wud have better sex?????? doesnt seem to be the brightest!

Anyway cant see how he will be let off lightly for taking drugs even thou they are recreational drugs when Rio didnt even take anything and just missed a test! that would seem a bit mental.....ok Rio you get 8 months for missing a test but dont worry you didnt take anything

Then less than a year later a player is caught taking drugs and they wont give him more than 8 months? no chance! not likely with the way the FA went on and on about drugs with Rio and that they dont let people off lightly! then all the people from athletics saying he should have got 2 years!

Long ban will happen!

Third_Echelon

Big Nelly wrote:

Not sure who you work wit but I think most people would probably be sacked! not saying that people dont but they have to be caught! sure Mutu was taki the piss! out all the time! never at training! doing what he liked and not preforming! also didnt I hear somewhere he took it because someone said he wud have better sex?????? doesnt seem to be the brightest!

hence what i said in my post:

Third_Echelon wrote:

Fair enough if it interferes with his ability to carry out his work, then the company (chelsea) has the right to repremand the player... not the FA

Big Nelly wrote:

Anyway cant see how he will be let off lightly for taking drugs even thou they are recreational drugs when Rio didnt even take anything and just missed a test! that would seem a bit mental.....ok Rio you get 8 months for missing a test but dont worry you didnt take anything

Missing the test is just as bad as taking performance enhancing drugs. its basically saying, ok i know ive taken these drugs so ill just wait a few days for them to exit my system...

Big Nelly wrote:

Then less than a year later a player is caught taking drugs and they wont give him more than 8 months? no chance! not likely with the way the FA went on and on about drugs with Rio and that they dont let people off lightly! then all the people from athletics saying he should have got 2 years!

Long ban will happen!

The difference between performance enhancing drugs and recreational drugs is that they dont enhance your performance on the field. Its a moral/social issue rather than a sporting one, hence the FA should have no duristiction over it...

sharkman

Big Nelly wrote:

when Rio didnt even take anything

Ehhh , How can you prove this .. Thets why he diddnt go for the bloody test !

Big Ears

Big Nelly wrote:

Anyway cant see how he will be let off lightly for taking drugs even thou they are recreational drugs when Rio didnt even take anything and just missed a test! that would seem a bit mental.....ok Rio you get 8 months for missing a test but dont worry you didnt take anything

Then less than a year later a player is caught taking drugs and they wont give him more than 8 months? no chance! not likely with the way the FA went on and on about drugs with Rio and that they dont let people off lightly! then all the people from athletics saying he should have got 2 years!

Prove Rio didn't take anything , and before anyone metions about a hair folical test , I would like to remind them that that cover most recreational drugs but only some performance enhancing drugs .

Id say the sentence will be a similiar length to Rio's .

Big Nelly

sharkman wrote:

Ehhh , How can you prove this .. Thets why he diddnt go for the bloody test !

Didnt Rio ring the day he missed it and said he could come back and the testers told him not to bother! also within a day or tow didnt he take the test and it was all clear! this wud suggest he hadnt anything in his system if he was willing to come back! I think I can remember that this was used in his defence because Utd had his mobile phone info and it showed he called them!!


Maybe Im wrong!

ZENER

Chelsea will not be too impressed - if he does get a lengthy ban they would have had to pay him his wages had they not suspended him already but then they will never sell him off with this hanging over him. This along with the fact he hasn't really cut the mustard for them means it's been a waste of over £15 million quid.

I think the ban will be the least of his worries, what club is going to want a player with his current rep knowing his past rep ? He may not get a ban but I doubt if he will get to play for the teams he would previously have played for - I'd say his reputation bad as it was is ruined.

ZEN

Third_Echelon

ZENER wrote:

Chelsea will not be too impressed - if he does get a lengthy ban they would have had to pay him his wages had they not suspended him already but then they will never sell him off with this hanging over him. This along with the fact he hasn't really cut the mustard for them means it's been a waste of over £15 million quid.

I think the ban will be the least of his worries, what club is going to want a player with his current rep knowing his past rep ? He may not get a ban but I doubt if he will get to play for the teams he would previously have played for - I'd say his reputation bad as it was is ruined.

ZEN

Shatkar Dontesk (sp?) want him apparently...

ZENER

How recently did they enquire about him, since these revelation ? I doubt if they will take him for what Chelsea payed for him knowing he may not play for up to 2 years if he is found guilty.

ZEN

Third_Echelon

it was just after the drugs admission came out... their manager is a romanian i think and he said he'd take him no probs..

The Muppet

Thats what was so wrong and unfair about Rio's punishment. How can the FA give less than an 8 month sentence without leaving themselves open to allegations of favouritism and making a laughing stock of themselves.

They said at the time that anyone caught abusing driugs would be severly deat with from then on.

Part of the case agains Rio was the bad example his actions gave to Kids. Well it makes no difference whether its recreational or performance enhancing drugs, MUTU having failed the test is a worse example and so his punishment will have to be more severe.

I cant see anyone buy a player that could be facing a two year ban from the game.

The Ferdinand case has been debated to death here and there is little that can be added but someone asked earlier how we knew Rio Ferdinad didn't take drugs. Ferdinand did take tests in the wake of his missed test that proved he was clean,


{unable to find the full articel about thetest but its mentioned here just to prove i'm not making it up }
Link

sharkman

The whole Rio thing has been debated to death .........But cocaine is detectable in the bloodstream for 24 - 60 hours depending on metabolic rate and other factors .. Hence Rio's tests prove nothing .

He is as guilty as Mutu !

yop

"Because it was recreational drugs and not enhancing drugs."

That is it exactly, if the rules were correct then he should not get done as bad as Rio as the drug did not aid in his performance (on the soccer pitch anyway )

BUT if they did say that Rio was not a good example for kids and used this to aid in givin him 8 months then Mutu should get the same.

The Muppet

sharkman wrote:

The whole Rio thing has been debated to death .........But cocaine is detectable in the bloodstream for 24 - 60 hours depending on metabolic rate and other factors .. Hence Rio's tests prove nothing .

He is as guilty as Mutu !

I can't counter that argument but it was not a blood test Rio passed but a test on a hair follicle and they said at the time it proved he hadn't taken drugs. Now whether they just meant performance enhancing ones I dont know.

We do know for sure Rio was cleared of taking performance enhancing drugs so even if Rio did take recreational drugs he still got an 8 month ban so if anyone else gets less of a sentence for teh same or worse offence it will just add furter proof to the FA conspiracy theory that us paranoid Utd. supporters so love to recount.

You know the one about Mr. D*** of the FA and The chairman of A****** F.C. alledgedly Conspiring to rob united of their best defender in the run in to last seasons title and the start of this season.

:cool: :

sharkman

Yes , I agree . Mutu (If proven Guilty) should be dealt a heavier sentance than Rio .

Drug test info was from Here

cournioni

Double blow for Mutu

Haha... That's genious.

ZENER

PORNAPSTER wrote:

Haha... That's genious.

Link doesn't work for me !!! What is it ?

ZEN

sharkman

Well done PORNAPSTER . Positive rep for being the first one to notice the play on words .


Blow = Cocaine

ZENER

er . . I always thought blow = hash !??

/ me goes back into shelter !

ZEN

cournioni

Well in Ireland its hash, in America it's cocaine (the movie Blow is all about Cocaine).

Still genious though. Cheers sharkman.

Anyhow... back on topic...

Boro

Mutu was sacked by Chelsea apparently, not just suspended.

Linky

DapperGent

I didn't think they'd give him the bullet, it's a big investment to write off.

I guess they figured they'd never get a transfer fee for him and that he'd sit out his contract rather than take less than £60,000 a week. I'm surprised they didn't wait to see what kind of ban he got.

If he gets a year or less it could be a bad move financially to shítcan him. Ah well I guess they don't really worry about the cash up Chelski way.

AdMMM

I reckon this means that Carlton Cole will be recalled from loan.

Mutu is being used as an example as Cheski. Jose wants to show the rest of the team that if you act out of line and start taking things that you shouldnt take, then you're going to be punished severely.

I bet Mutu is regretting it now, he'll have no source of income until the ban (presuming he is found guilty) has passed.

pickarooney

sharkman wrote:

Well done PORNAPSTER . Positive rep for being the first one to notice the play on words .


Blow = Cocaine

I thought it was just another three-in-a-bed story.

The Muppet

According to the Sunday Telegraph Chelsea are planning to sue sacked striker Adrian Mutu for the loss of transfer value in a landmark case and want to bar him from moving to another club until legal action is resolved.

That's an interesting twist to the story if true. I would imagine Chelsea would have had a stronger case if they had waited for what ever ban he is to get to be imposed before sacking him. As it stands Chelsea must shoulder some of the blame for th loss of transfer value as they released him from his contract before his punishment was announced.

KdjaCL

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/3968851.stm

Odd that, he should be banned for 2 years, but im sure he will get less than Rio it is the FA.

/me recalls how me was spot on him and Crespo would fail on pitch and were bad signings..

kdjac

The Muppet

KdjaC wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/3968851.stm

Odd that, he should be banned for 2 years, but im sure he will get less than Rio it is the FA.

/me recalls how me was spot on him and Crespo would fail on pitch and were bad signings..

kdjac

That link appears to be dead .

A Dub in Glasgo

I very much doubt if Chelsea have any case for compensation. They may have stood a better case if they tried to help Mutu through his addiction and support him to get to the level of playing that would justify some club buying him. They wanted rid of him and took the obvious action of sacking the player.

I hear Wenger has already intimated that he would be prepared to sign Mutu after he serves a drugs ban.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/eng_prem/3968851.stm

KdjaCL

Wenger offers a lifeline to Mutu

Adrian Mutu
Chelsea sack Mutu
What next for Mutu?
A year to forget for Mutu
Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger would consider signing Adrian Mutu once the striker has served his drugs ban.

Mutu was sacked by Chelsea on Friday after testing positive for cocaine - a move Wenger has backed.

But he said: "I don't even wonder if that could happen because I think he will be suspended for a long period.

"But once he has served his suspension, he has the right again to start from zero. I would then meet the player and see what he tells me."

Mutu faces a ban of between six months and two years when the Football Association decides on his punishment.

Chelsea decided to act before his case was heard and sacked the striker on grounds of gross misconduct after his admission he had taken an illegal substance.


I might as well walk away from football. What is there left for me?
Adrian Mutu
But Mutu has hit out at the club's decision, saying: "Chelsea have destroyed me."

He told the Sunday Mirror: "I don't know what I'm going to do. I am shocked and surprised by their decision.

"I didn't expect them to pay me while I was suspended but I never thought they would sack me either.

"Why didn't they wait to do this? Now my career is in ruins.

"I might as well walk away from football. What is there left for me?"


Mourinho stands by Mutu sacking
Chelsea have been criticised for their stance, with the Professional Footballers' Association accusing the club of failing in their duty of care to the player.

And Mutu agreed, adding: "It is unfair. If they were going to sack me they should have done it afterwards.

"Why did they go public? To make an example of me? It makes it very difficult for me now."



// works for me

kdjac

Big Ears

The Muppet wrote:

I can't counter that argument but it was not a blood test Rio passed but a test on a hair follicle and they said at the time it proved he hadn't taken drugs. Now whether they just meant performance enhancing ones I dont know.

'Prove Rio didn't take anything , and before anyone mentions about a hair folical test , I would like to remind them that that cover most recreational drugs but only some performance enhancing drugs .'

Guess you missed my post from earlier .

The Muppet

KdjaC wrote:

Wenger offers a lifeline to Mutu

..................................................
// works for me

kdjac

Works fine for me now too must have been something strange with my PC.

Thats a very interesting article, I don't think the crime merits the guy losing his livlihood but he is facing a lengthy ban. Now that chelseas have left him out to dry I think the situation is open to give him the maximun 2 years. It will certainly have to be longer than 8 months or the media will have a field day with the FA.

eirebhoy

Lets say a player had taken some sort of performance enhancing drug and was tested positive, I've no doubt he'd get a 2 year ban from the FA. I'd be pretty sure that Rio didn't take any sort of drug and just forgot about the test but there is no way of proven this. Its a long shot but a player could test postive one day and the drug would be gone from his system the next day. Due to this the FA had to ban Rio for missing his drug test as there is always a chance that he could have taken a performance enhancing drug and missed the test purposely.

Recreational drugs are treated seperately and rightly so. A player/athlete who takes a PE drug is gaining an advantage over his fellow competitors and is blatently cheating. Someone who takes a recreational drug is doing so his body damage and if I was Sepp Blatter I wouldn't even ban players for taking recreational drugs. The player would be doing himself and his club enough damage as it is and the like of Rehab should be enough (A lot of clubs would sack him anyway). Its not as if a player will go out and take cocaine if he knows he won't get banned. Mutu most likely wouldn't have taken coke if Mourinho wasn't treating him so harshly and not even given him a place on the bench. Most players put there careers before their social life.

There is no way you can compare Rio's situation to Mutu's. Performance Enhancing drugs are taken to boost a players career while taking recreational drugs are doing the exact opposite.

BTW - The only reason players in Mutu's situation are at risk banned is because they are given the sport a bad name. They actually aren't given the sport a bad name. Maybe there given bad example's to kids but I could come up with 100 other things that give bad examples to kids.