Adrian Mutu’s €17m Chelsea Fine Is A Crime Against Humanity

[LeBron]

Adrian Mutu’s €17m Chelsea Fine Is A Crime Against Humanity

The Fiorentina forward is set to be bankrupted following Friday’s decision by the Court of Arbitration for Sport


History has taught us that just because a person is found guilty by a court of law, this does not necessarily mean that he or she is actually guilty. Indeed, often it is politics and economics that decide the outcome of a legal case. There have been numerous examples over the years – the latest last Friday when Fiorentina forward Adrian Mutu was ordered to pay compensation of £14.6 million (€17m) to former club Chelsea.

For those of you unfamiliar with this case, here is a brief recap. In August 2003, Roman Abramovich’s nouveau-riche Chelsea signed Mutu from Parma for £15.8m (€18.6m by today’s conversion). After an explosive start the Romanian lost his way in the second half of the season, and by the onset of the 2004-05 campaign began to encounter a few problems with new Blues manager Jose Mourinho. In September 2004, Mutu failed a drugs test for cocaine for which he would receive a £20,000 fine from the Football Association (FA) together with a seven-month ban. Chelsea also took the additional step of sacking Mutu, leaving him as a free agent.

Despite still having a further five months of his suspension to run, Mutu then joined Juventus on a free transfer in January 2005 (he would then move on again to Fiorentina in the summer of 2006), with the Bianconeri fighting off all attempts by Chelsea to gain compensation.

What would follow is years of legal wrangling between Chelsea and Mutu, culminating with the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) ruling that the striker had committed a breach of contract by taking cocaine, and that under FIFA’s laws for compensation he was liable for the transfer fee Chelsea wrote off their accounts when they sacked him. The final damages, following an unsuccessful appeal, were set at £14.6m (€17m).

Is this justice? It was Chelsea who took the decision to sack Mutu, and it was their idiocy to release him on a free transfer rather than sell him on and limit their damages. Had they done the latter, it could theoretically be argued that Mutu should morally have paid the difference. So if Mutu then signed for Manchester United for £12.8m, the player would need to pay Chelsea £3m.

Yet even this would have been highly contentious and ground-breaking, for when the Romanian joined Chelsea, he had no say in fixing the transfer fee. Indeed many would argue that The Blues paid over the odds for him, just as they did with a whole host of players who arrived during Roman Abramovich’s first summer in English football. (Compare the situation then to Manchester City now) How can Mutu be responsible for a transfer fee that was agreed between Parma and Chelsea? If Abramovich had been feeling extra generous the day he handed over a cheque to Emilia-Romagna, and decided to splash out a Cristiano Ronaldo type fee of £80m, would Mutu now be expected to pay all that back? The premise is so ridiculous that the late great advocate George Carman must be considering a comeback - but the CAS regards it as valid!

The local media in Britain has been largely acquiescent over the incident, with anti-drug piety colouring the coverage. As for Chelsea, they have yet to comment. Why would they? Even though they may have to wait some time before receiving some or all of the Mutu cash, they can rest assured that their interests are consonant with those of the other big clubs that are favoured by judgements like these. The governing bodies in football - including the CAS, which is now largely football focused - are desperate to protect these superpowers because without them they cannot exist. Thus, they have little choice but to team with the likes of Chelsea during these disputes. And for some in the media, dissenting from the large clubs can mean losing vital coverage opportunities - not to mention the gasps that are elicited by any mention of a drug-related offence, no matter how underwhelming or how much the player has righted wrongs since then.

No doubt FIFA and CAS, having seen clubs lose a vast amount of control since the Bosman Ruling, have not squandered an opportunity to claw back some ‘player power’. Mutu has been made an example of in the battle against drugs in football, only that in this case it is an example of how there is no point reforming yourself because you will still be persecuted afterwards.

Following his well-documented personal problems circa 2004, Mutu has completely turned around his life. As recently as 2007, the Guardian newspaper praised Mutu fulsomely for his newfound maturity. Indeed, it is no exaggeration whatsoever to call the Romanian a completely changed man. Perhaps, then, the sacking from Chelsea was a wake-up call that he needed. But it did not stop there, and the millstone around his neck won't go away. The message this sends out to all those who are struggling with drink, drugs, gambling and other difficulties is to continue drinking, continue taking drugs and continue gambling because the 'football community' will never forgive and certainly never forget.

Or perhaps help and acceptance is only offered when there are special interests to consider. If a player more friendly with Mourinho had tested positive for the devil’s dandruff, would Chelsea have taken the same decision in sacking them? What about Rio Ferdinand in 2003 when he failed/refused to take a drugs test, and was subsequently banned for eight months and fined £50,000? Ferdinand had signed for The Red Devils from Leeds only a year earlier for £29.1m, but did Man Utd ditch him before then attempting to sue him? Certainly not - they stood by their man, and both the club and Rio have reaped the rewards.

This has all been a PR disaster for Chelsea and FIFA, while the authority and status of CAS could be almost irreversibly broken if, as expected, Mutu takes the next legal step and drags his ex-employers into the European Court of Human Rights - a body that, despite its clear flaws, is not in thrall to the mega-clubs and has in the past showed willingness to consider the rights of players as workers, rather than rows on a balance sheet.

As it stands, Mutu is a broken man. At the age of nearly 31 he has very little earning potential left, meaning that he will retire with nothing to show financially for his efforts.

Assuming this verdict is actually enforced, of course. In a bittersweet coda, it's thought deeply unlikely that Chelsea will get the money anytime soon. Just as over Gibraltar's membership of UEFA, the CAS is a paper tiger - and one that would perhaps be best placed in the wastebasket.

[The Kop]

good article, agree 100%

[Translator]

good article, agree 100%

Can only hope for his sake that since Chelsea showed they wanted to sue and while he goes through the appeal process he's been moving all his assets into other names/ entities etc so by the time he exhausts his last avenue to appeal he can just declare himself bankrupt and pay nothing anyway. I'd be asking Fiorentina to sign me up as an amateur but pay my Mrs' etc millions for being a cheerleader

[BAGGIO 15]

This can be looked at from 2 angles, those that see Chelsea as the Victim and those that see Mutu.
I can see both, but feel the game and Chelsea should of stood by Mutu and shown like Arsenal did with Adams with the drink that even a high profile person has flaws, but the club will support and help rejuvenate them.
They could of turned him around and used him to promote an anti drug message to those less fortunate. This would of been good promotion, but that isn't the Russian way and lets be brutaly honest the English game is far from English and that is becoming more evident every season.
English values don't matter it depends on that of the owner.
What will Man City do if a player steels, cut his hand off?
I hate foreign ownership.

[ruud]

i heard juventus agreed to pay the fee?

[Juventino]

i heard juventus agreed to pay the fee?

No, because we happened to sign Mutu, Chelsea wanted us to pay, and we basically said "shiraz off, why should we".

[BAGGIO 15]

Not our problem he was sacked.
Thats were Chelsea shiraz up, they could of transfer listed him and recouped some money.

[Union Carbide]

Not our problem he was sacked.
Thats were Chelsea shiraz up, they could of transfer listed him and recouped some money.

Agree.

[Juventino]

Not our problem he was sacked.
Thats were Chelsea shiraz up, they could of transfer listed him and recouped some money.

Exactly. I couldn't believe they had the audacity to demand we pay the money.

[delfino_1936]

If Chelski make poor Mutu go backrupt, that's just shiraz wrong!

[BAGGIO 15]

If Chelski make poor Mutu go backrupt, that's just shiraz wrong!

Don't get me wrong, MUTU was stupid, but the Russian attitude is behnd this.

[The one and only]

good article, agree 100%

[DOC]

wonder wether they would have chased this if the economy hadn't gone tits up...

[hgd]

nothing to do with the economy. Chelsea have been chasing this for years. Its been tied up in the court of arbitration for sport almost since it happened they have been seeking compensation.

Chelsea really didn't have a choice, they had Mark Bosnich do the same thing just a couple of years earlier. Before Abramovich arrived, for all those of you who think it was his choice your way off the mark. Then Mutu comes in and does the same. He had to be made an example of, if other players at the club saw he did it and got away with it (apart from the ban obviously) then clearly that would set a terrible precedent for the club. The only option was to fire him instantly and release him from his contract. Honestly what club would be prepared to pay any money for a player that has just been banned for drug use? The only way you take a risk like that is when it isn't such a huge outlay by getting him on a free transfer. That was clearly the only way he could ever find a new club. A transfer was never going to be an option.

I don't like the fact that he might become bankrupt out of this, but such is the consequence for making such poor decisions. Professional footballers are the idols of kids around the world and anything that discourages them from being a bad example by taking drugs, alcohol etc. can only be a good thing. Its a greater good thing really.

[delfino_1936]

If Chelski make poor Mutu go backrupt, that's just shiraz wrong!

Don't get me wrong, MUTU was stupid, but the Russian attitude is behnd this.

of course he was an idiot for doing drugs, but doesn't mean they should leave him with literally nothing!

[Juventino]

I don't like the fact that he might become bankrupt out of this, but such is the consequence for making such poor decisions. Professional footballers are the idols of kids around the world and anything that discourages them from being a bad example by taking drugs, alcohol etc. can only be a good thing. Its a greater good thing really.

Mutu going bankrupt and not being able to provide for his family or whatever is for the greater good?

[hgd]

I don't like the fact that he might become bankrupt out of this, but such is the consequence for making such poor decisions. Professional footballers are the idols of kids around the world and anything that discourages them from being a bad example by taking drugs, alcohol etc. can only be a good thing. Its a greater good thing really.

Mutu going bankrupt and not being able to provide for his family or whatever is for the greater good?

Absolutely. Although I'm sure he'll be able to provide for his family, if you understand the greater good, the essence of it here is that although he will suffer the lives of potentially thousands of kids won't be ruined by his bad example not being dealt with correctly. This will have sent shudders through many professional players who may now think twice about using drugs, thus setting the example for kids to follow.

[DOC]

mutu might be able to appeal and use coke head party boy and sometimes cycler tom bonen's case as a precedent...

[Juventino]

I don't like the fact that he might become bankrupt out of this, but such is the consequence for making such poor decisions. Professional footballers are the idols of kids around the world and anything that discourages them from being a bad example by taking drugs, alcohol etc. can only be a good thing. Its a greater good thing really.

Mutu going bankrupt and not being able to provide for his family or whatever is for the greater good?

Absolutely. Although I'm sure he'll be able to provide for his family, if you understand the greater good, the essence of it here is that although he will suffer the lives of potentially thousands of kids won't be ruined by his bad example not being dealt with correctly. This will have sent shudders through many professional players who may now think twice about using drugs, thus setting the example for kids to follow.

I personally think that's crap. Mutu, sure he took drugs, but made a mistake. And now he and his family should have to suffer that for years to come...

Can't say I've ever heard somebody say "oh Maradona took drugs, so should I" or whoever. And if people are such blind sheep and would do that because someone famous did, well personally I have no sympathy for that. You need to be smart enough to amke your own decisions in life and, simple as that. Mutu did what he did, it is his personal life; and if you want to look at the example he has made, well people should think of the years of hard work and dedication he put in to get to where he is, not something he did for a few months of his life.

[hgd]

I personally think that's crap. Mutu, sure he took drugs, but made a mistake. And now he and his family should have to suffer that for years to come...

Can't say I've ever heard somebody say "oh Maradona took drugs, so should I" or whoever. And if people are such blind sheep and would do that because someone famous did, well personally I have no sympathy for that. You need to be smart enough to amke your own decisions in life and, simple as that. Mutu did what he did, it is his personal life; and if you want to look at the example he has made, well people should think of the years of hard work and dedication he put in to get to where he is, not something he did for a few months of his life.

Yeah fair enough that is true. I agree with you that it is obviously a persons own stupid fault if they chose that path, whether or not their heroes have done it. My point is though, as a general view, footballers are seen as role models to the youth. Naturally that brings with it a certain amount of social responsibility on their part whereby if they make poor decisions they have to deal with the consequences usually more so than your average man on the street. I'm not saying I agree with that, or that this the right outcome in this scenario, just that this is what has happened here and most likely in similar cases moving forward, it will happen again.

In this case as well, I think the fact that it was Mutu at Chelsea and not Lampard or Terry has meant that the club chose to deal with it in this way. He was more expendable, particularly at the time when the money was flowing and there to be spent on a replacement. Just look at Steven Gerrard's latest incident, a lesser player might have been offloaded as they were bad for the clubs image, but not him. He's an icon of the club so they'll just brush it under the rug and get on with things.

[Juventus FC]

Thats some expensive cocaine

[hgd]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/mattslater/2 ... _foll.html