Adrian Mutu revisited ...

[Rozay]

I made a thread a month or so back about countries who stopped producing top players, and Romania was one frequently mentioned in it. However, everyone went back to Gheorghe Hagi, and said nobody has come since then.

This underlined the shame of how Mutu’s career turned out, or at least, how it was defined. His is one footballer’s story I’d like to read a biography on. Was a child prodigy in Romania, but his world always seemed shady. Went to Italy, played for a couple of clubs before joining Parma and scoring 22 in 36 and getting a big money move to Chelsea. I remember the start of his Chelsea career - he was flying and looked a class above. Apparently didn’t fit in and got depressed, which led to his demons resurfacing with drink, drugs and hookers. He was investigated for Domestic Violence, and dated a load of TV stars and was quite a playboy. He was probably the first high-profile falling out Mourinho had with any player in his career.

As we know, he tested positive for cocaine and was sacked by Chelsea and banned from football. He ended up back in Italy at Juve via Livorno, in a bit of a dodgy deal as he was only a Livorno player for about two weeks. Juve were relegated shortly after for match-fixing and Mutu left for Fiorentina, finding his home, again showing world-class form. Chelsea weren’t happy that he was just moving on and they had lost money on him, with other clubs profiting for free. They sued him and he was ordered to pay about £15m, which he still owes them til this day and litigation is still ongoing as far as I know. During his time at Fiorentina, he also failed another drug test, this time for a more performance enhancing drug, and was again banned from football.

On the pitch, he equalled Hagi’s scoring record of 35 goals (in about half the games). He also appeared in a Snoop Dogg video once!

 

[DeSign]

Was studying in Florence when Mutu was there. Met a few plumbers who told us that when they went to his house, he was snorting coke. Seemed to have a decent cult following though with many Viola fans sporting his shirt.

 

[freeurmind]

So Chelsea terminated his contract and then sued him? Madness. Not condoning taking PEDs or coke or whatever he was on but that's a bit ridiculous.

 

[Rozay]

So Chelsea terminated his contract and then sued him? Madness. Not condoning taking PEDs or coke or whatever he was on but that's a bit ridiculous.

Think their logic was that they paid £16m for him, and another club is now benefitting from his scoring goals for them while Chelsea received no remuneration. Technically, the termination of contract was due to a breach by Mutu. If it had happened one month after he joined Chelsea, for £16m - and one year later Fiorentina have a new start striker for free, they would be validated in wondering why they have been left financially screwed in the whole thing, when they did nothing wrong.

 

[freeurmind]

Think their logic was that they paid £16m for him, and another club is now benefitting from his scoring goals for them while Chelsea received no remuneration. Technically, the termination of contract was due to a breach by Mutu. If it had happened one month after he joined Chelsea, for £16m - and one year later Fiorentina have a new start striker for free, they would be validated in wondering why they have been left financially screwed in the whole thing, when they did nothing wrong.

Obviously I'm not an expert on the finer details of football contracts but Mutu had nothing to do with the fee Chelsea paid right? How can he be liable for that? I could understand Chelsea wanting the sign-on fee back but asking for the player to front the transfer fee is ridiculous imo.

 

[UnrelatedPsuedo]

Think their logic was that they paid £16m for him, and another club is now benefitting from his scoring goals for them while Chelsea received no remuneration. Technically, the termination of contract was due to a breach by Mutu. If it had happened one month after he joined Chelsea, for £16m - and one year later Fiorentina have a new start striker for free, they would be validated in wondering why they have been left financially screwed in the whole thing, when they did nothing wrong.

That’s not logic. They fired him. They fecked themselves.

He didn’t breach a contract.

Chelsea handled it as badly as they could have, and they got the outcome they deserved.

 

[Ali Dia]

There was a great article about this in the athletic a little while back.


When Adrian Mutu tested positive for cocaine and was sacked by Chelsea
https://theathletic.com/1813712/2020/05/18/chelsea-adrian-mutu-cocaine/?source=user_shared_article

it seems Chelsea kept it in house for a while but they knew it was going to come out as it was an open secret in football at the time.

he was a classy player on his day.

 

[Rozay]

That’s not logic. They fired him. They fecked themselves.

He didn’t breach a contract.

Chelsea handled it as badly as they could have, and they got the outcome they deserved.

Well seemingly every court agreed with them, including various appeal courts and CAS. They just haven’t been paid.

 

[Patchbeard]

I remember being very jealous of this new Chelsea signing when he was on fire when he joined. Didn't realise he only managed 6 goals for Chelsea...

 

[horsechoker]

What was Mutu supposed to do after getting sacked?

Turn shit so Chelsea wouldn't feel hard done by?

 

[adexkola]

Does coke enhance performance?

Football performance you pervs

 

[LiquidSnake]

He also appeared in a Snoop Dogg video once!

This underlined the shame of how Mutu’s career turned out

 

[Based Adnan]

Could have been the Romanian Shevchenko

 

[Lay]

Looked class for the first 6-7 games for Chelsea

 

[jackal&hyde]

In short he was a rotten apple that liked to hang out with the wrong people; fame and money got to him, that only attracted more wrong people and to this day he has few if any regrets. Chelsea acted strange with the law sued but Mutu's agent is the most shady personality in football in Romania with a lot of connections in Italy, he did a few years in prison not to long ago so as a Romanian i'm actually going to give Chelsea the benefit of a doubt that they found something not right with the contract, the way he left, etc.

Extremely talented and a match winner for Romania on many occasions, arguably more important to the team then Hagi was (not because he was better but because Hagi had some other great players with him). It's probably a little unfair to say but many believe, me included, his terrible character was infections to the entire generation at the time.

 

[André Dominguez]

Had everything going on his favour to become a world class player, then drugs came along and everything went downhill from there. He really have no one but himself to complain.

 

[duffer]

That’s not logic. They fired him. They fecked themselves.

He didn’t breach a contract.

Chelsea handled it as badly as they could have, and they got the outcome they deserved.

He did breach a contract, that's why he got sacked.

The premier League agreed he owes us, FIFA agreed he owes us, CAS agreed he owes us, the Swiss Supreme Court agreed he owes us and finally, the European Court of Human Rights agreed he owes us. Those bodies have all looked at this.

I don't think I here's any other court Mutu can appeal to. Maybe Judge Judy?

 

[RUCK4444]

Hear me out... He tried to adopt a Chinese baby that made news when it was flushed down the toilet!!

Completely random I know but just thought I’d throw that out there for ya’ll.

 

[Wiltord02]

He did breach a contract, that's why he got sacked.

The premier League agreed he owes us, FIFA agreed he owes us, CAS agreed he owes us, the Swiss Supreme Court agreed he owes us and finally, the European Court of Human Rights agreed he owes us. Those bodies have all looked at this.

I don't think I here's any other court Mutu can appeal to. Maybe Judge Judy?

Judge Rinder

 

[Vidyoyo]

He did breach a contract, that's why he got sacked.

The premier League agreed he owes us, FIFA agreed he owes us, CAS agreed he owes us, the Swiss Supreme Court agreed he owes us and finally, the European Court of Human Rights agreed he owes us. Those bodies have all looked at this.

I don't think I here's any other court Mutu can appeal to. Maybe Judge Judy?

If he waits for the inevitable apocalyptic post-coronavirus world he always can give Judge Dredd a call.

 

[The Original]

The premier League agreed he owes us, FIFA agreed he owes us, CAS agreed he owes us, the Swiss Supreme Court agreed he owes us and finally, the European Court of Human Rights agreed he owes us. Those bodies have all looked at this.

That's not the precise truth. The truth is that there are things these Courts agreed on and things they don't. For example, the CAS overruled a portion of FIFA's decision - namely that Livorno and Juventus should bear a part of the cost. Also, the particular issue that was considered by the ECHR was not the substantive question of whether the judgment was the correct one, but rather, a procedural question of the eligibility of one of the members of the Panel, who reportedly has ties to Abrahimovich.

It seems quite strange to demand payment from a player who was sacked. His just punishment should be the sacking, whereas this is precisely the sort of risk that ought to be covered by insurance.

 

[flappyjay]

Chelsea had every right to sue him. The honest truth though is the decision makers at the club made a really bad decision. What exactly did they think would happen when his ban ended?

Good player who snorted coke, didn't do something heinous like rape so was always going to have value after the ban.

 

[11101]

They sued him and he was ordered to pay about £15m, which he still owes them til this day and litigation is still ongoing as far as I know.

I'm glad he hasn't paid it and i hope he never does. It never sat well with me the way they tried to ruin him when they were the ones that sacked him. And especially when you remember what they were doing to football at the time.

 

[1950]

Chelsea also sacked Bosnich for doing coke a couple years before Mutu, but didn't sue him.

If their motivation was financial, they would have been better off just sweeping that kind of thing under the rug like every other club and sell him for a negligible loss. By now it's pretty clear that it is simply severe pettiness, because they will never get a single pound out of Mutu.

 

[Maluco]

I can’t help but think the reaction to all this would be so different in 2020 where people in the game are finally opening up about certain problems and their mental health.

With so much money and potential in one player (because we are still a cynical bunch), I can’t help but feel like Mutu in 2020 would get far more help and treatment instead of being demonized.

I don’t think it’s right to say someone living a reckless lifestyle is a “bad boy”. He could be fighting some serious demons and it’s unfortunate that it happened at a time where football was still in the dark ages.

Chelseas reaction was about saving themselves rather than assisting one of their own who was clearly struggling. I would like to think that today, he would be offered support from the club and would be encouraged to take time away to look after himself.

 

[duffer]

Chelsea also sacked Bosnich for doing coke a couple years before Mutu, but didn't sue him.

We didn't spend £17 million on Bosnich (he was a free transfer). The point of suing Mutu was to get that investment back.

The club won't get a penny back and it probably is pettiness to not let it drop. Hard to feel much sympathy for Mutu though, guy's a scumbag*.

*not for doing coke, for other shit like breaking a waiters nose when asked to pay his bill.

 

[Demyanenko_square_jaw]

Excellent talent undone by his dedication problems.

Another excellent Romanian player from just before Mutu's generation that had the talent to have a much better career was "the Cobra" Adrian Ilie. He was more of a creative player than scorer, but had the same attacking positional versatility as Mutu. He had a great start at Valencia, but got ruined by persistant injuries just as they went into higher gear as a team and became one of the best in Europe. Very unlucky player.

 

[Rozay]

I'm glad he hasn't paid it and i hope he never does. It never sat well with me the way they tried to ruin him when they were the ones that sacked him. And especially when you remember what they were doing to football at the time.

I can kind of see both sides. I agree that Mutu should stick two fingers at them, but I understand Chelsea thinking ‘what about the money we just spent’.

That said, Chelsea could have just stuck by him if they wanted too. If we sacked Rio when he got banned, we’d have lost out on the £30m we spent on him too. We kept him, and eventually got value back for him, so Chelsea have themselves to blame if finances was a concern for them.

 

[Dave Smith]

I could be wrong but I am pretty sure Chelsea have won in every single court Chelsea v Mutu has gone through (including appeals.) That tells me that there is obviously something about the case that is shady as otherwise it surely would've lost at least once. This goes double as the supposed reasons were a) Chelsea sacked him for substance abuse and b) Mutu was suffering (or has at least claimed) from mental health issues. If those issues are correct and the only reasons I do not see how Chelsea have won so many cases/appeals.

In my opinion, Mutu and/or his entourage must've done something that meant he committed some form of constructive dismissal. I suspect that he may have said that he was retiring from football (and Chelsea have evidence for this) in order to get the contract terminated then went out after his ban and started playing again. That for me would also explain why Chelsea also tried to go after Juve and Livorno.

 

[Rozay]

I could be wrong but I am pretty sure Chelsea have won in every single court Chelsea v Mutu has gone through (including appeals.) That tells me that there is obviously something about the case that is shady as otherwise it surely would've lost at least once. This goes double as the supposed reasons were a) Chelsea sacked him for substance abuse and b) Mutu was suffering (or has at least claimed) from mental health issues. If those issues are correct and the only reasons I do not see how Chelsea have won so many cases/appeals.

In my opinion, Mutu and/or his entourage must've done something that meant he committed some form of constructive dismissal. I suspect that he may have said that he was retiring from football (and Chelsea have evidence for this) in order to get the contract terminated then went out after his ban and started playing again. That for me would also explain why Chelsea also tried to go after Juve and Livorno.

Think that’s quite a reach to be fair. There is no indication at all that Mutu was officially retired. Chelsea put out a statement to say they sacked him. Mutu never announced any retirement, and I see no real reason to assume that would be his intentions, given his age.

I can see why Chelsea would want money back though. I’m not sure that they should get it back from Mutu. The debt is the amount of the transfer fee from what I gather, a fee that he did not determine, and was not paid to him. I would understand if they wanted his signing bonus returned, or if they had paid his contract in advance for some strange reason, they would want a rebate. But the money they paid Parma to agree to release him from his contract has nothing to do with the player. If Parma had said ‘nah, you’re alright, just give us a tenner’, the move would have gone ahead all the same.

 

[Dave Smith]

Think that’s quite a reach to be fair. There is no indication at all that Mutu was officially retired. Chelsea put out a statement to say they sacked him. Mutu never announced any retirement, and I see no real reason to assume that would be his intentions, given his age.

I can see why Chelsea would want money back though. I’m not sure that they should get it back from Mutu. The debt is the amount of the transfer fee from what I gather, a fee that he did not determine, and was not paid to him. I would understand if they wanted his signing bonus returned, or if they had paid his contract in advance for some strange reason, they would want a rebate. But the money they paid Parma to agree to release him from his contract has nothing to do with the player. If Parma had said ‘nah, you’re alright, just give us a tenner’, the move would have gone ahead all the same.

But herein lies the problem. If the facts of the case are the ones we know about then Chelsea surely have no leg to stand on. However, throughout the process they won at every single hurdle. For that reason, there must be some form of constructive dismissal on Mutu's side as it does not make sense that Chelsea can claim compensation directly from the player or that they thought they had a chance of getting either Juve of Livorno to pony up. I admit that the retirement idea is pure speculation on my part, however there has got to be a lot more to it than Mutu enjoyed living life like Rick James and Chelsea decided to sack him for it.

 

[P0GBA]

I remember being very unhappy at the time that Mutu was only banned for 9 months when he was known to be regularly taking drugs and Rio was banned for 8 months although he hadn't taken any.

 

[RyRoc]

The first I heard that he had mental health problems was reading this thread. Correct me if I’m wrong but wasn’t his reason for taking cocaine at the time that he could improve his performance in the bedroom and that’s kind of where the lack of sympathy from Chelsea came from? I guess it does make sense that he’s had some mental challenges and agree I think the whole situation would have certainly been handled better now.

 

[Sandikan]

That’s not logic. They fired him. They fecked themselves.

He didn’t breach a contract.

Chelsea handled it as badly as they could have, and they got the outcome they deserved.

He breached the contract by his reckless behaviour.

No fan of Chelsea, but not at all surprised they got after him.

I'm sure most of us are sick of clubs showing zero morals keeping players on despite horrible offences just because they're valuable.

 

[Sandikan]

I remember being very unhappy at the time that Mutu was only banned for 9 months when he was known to be regularly taking drugs and Rio was banned for 8 months although he hadn't taken any.

I thought Rio's ban was longer. Making it even more ludicrous and pure example making nonsense.

 

[Rozay]

I thought Rio's ban was longer. Making it even more ludicrous and pure example making nonsense.

Mutu was banned for recreational drugs remember. I’m guessing the logic with Rio is that his skipping of the test meant that performance enhancing couldn’t be ruled out, which would be ‘cheating’, while cocaine isn’t.

That’s all I can suggest, although I’m sure either Stam or Davids got banned for less despite testing positive for PEDs around the same time as Rio.

 

[Ibi Dreams]

I think they make punishments for taking PEDs and for missing PED tests more or less the same. Otherwise you'd just miss the test if you knew you were going to test positive and get a lesser ban

 

[Sandikan]

Mutu was banned for recreational drugs remember. I’m guessing the logic with Rio is that his skipping of the test meant that performance enhancing couldn’t be ruled out, which would be ‘cheating’, while cocaine isn’t.

That’s all I can suggest, although I’m sure either Stam or Davids got banned for less despite testing positive for PEDs around the same time as Rio.

I make you right in their idea of logic.

But for some reason, I can't see Rio as some ultra calculating guy who knew he had to wait the exact amount of hours for whatever supposed drug was in his system, as he had tests quite quickly after, and there was no evidence of anything.

It was the classic penalise the high profile player approach. The sort of situation the ABU would never give credence to, as United are treated specially remember.