|
Post by ILR on Aug 23, 2004 17:52:35 GMT -5
I think Im going to throw up!! I saw pictures of her too and it was disgusting. Decently good looking? Are we talking about the same person? He looks like Shrek. Thats the nickname he has in England! I dont think he would have to pay but I think the age he was at and with all the money he had, he didn't know what to do with it. I feel sorry for Coleen.
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 13, 2004 16:21:15 GMT -5
Oh David.....I forgot to post this www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,11043354%255E401,00.html DAVID Beckham is embroiled in yet another sex scandal, but friends of the woman at the centre of the allegations say she ruthlessly set out to entrap the soccer star. Another scandal... David Beckham and wife Victoria Beautician Dannielle Heath, 22, sold her story of twice bedding the England captain to Britain's Sunday Mirror newspaper for more than $250,000. In a detailed expose, she claimed she had shared oral sex with Beckham at his Madrid home last August - 24 hours after he and wife Victoria announced they were expecting their third child. She said she had spent another night with him there two weeks ago. Ironically, Beckham met Heath through his wife. However last night it emerged the Essex woman told family and friends that from the outset she hatched a plot to turn her liaison with Beckham into a lucrative kiss-and-tell. Friend Kerry Hopkinson said Heath had "a long history of fleecing men" and had targeted soccer stars for years. The Beckhams issued a furious denial of the claims.
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Oct 13, 2004 17:19:49 GMT -5
$250K? Looks like she's the one who got fleeced
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 13, 2004 17:21:27 GMT -5
I didnt even think it was that much. If its true (you never know these days) then it was only a couple of days after they found out Posh was pregnant.
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 17, 2004 15:06:40 GMT -5
skysports.planetfootball.com/list.asp?hlid=232090&CPID=8&CLID=&lid=2&title=Premiership+star+'tests+positive' It has been reported that a Premiership player has failed a drugs test. The Mail on Sunday claimed that a player had tested positive for a 'banned substance', although The FA have not commented on the report. The player in question, and his club, have not been named for legal reasons. The FA have tightened their doping procedures following Rio Ferdinand's missed drugs test last year. They stated in July that they would significantly increase the number of tests carried out following the recommendations of a report by Lord Coe. ------------------------------------ I know who it is ;D
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Oct 17, 2004 16:00:55 GMT -5
Well, don't leave us in suspense!
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 17, 2004 16:08:45 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Oct 17, 2004 16:29:57 GMT -5
How did you find out? Do you know what the banned substance was?
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 17, 2004 16:32:17 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Oct 17, 2004 16:37:21 GMT -5
So Sky was just being tactful? Tsk tsk! Oh, well. Does it spell any real trouble for Chelsea?
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 17, 2004 16:38:59 GMT -5
Yeh, dont know why though Not Chelsea no. But for Mutu yes. If 2nd sample is positive then he gets a suspension of 2 years probably
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 18, 2004 13:31:28 GMT -5
the banned substance is supposedly cocaine
|
|
|
Post by Lee on Oct 18, 2004 14:17:49 GMT -5
Another guy flushes his career down the drain with cocaine. Pity!!
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 27, 2004 17:50:24 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 27, 2004 17:57:16 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Oct 29, 2004 9:56:21 GMT -5
Chelsea sack Mutu after positive dope test Fri 29 October, 2004 13:37 By Mitch Phillips
LONDON, Oct 29 (Reuters) - Chelsea have sacked their Romanian striker Adrian Mutu after he tested positive for cocaine last month.
"Chelsea has terminated the contract of Adrian Mutu for gross misconduct," the Premier League club said on Friday.
"The decision comes after the player's positive drugs test for cocaine and his admission that he took the drug."
Mutu, 25, bought from Parma last year for almost 16 million pounds ($29.30 million), faces a two-year ban from soccer. He is the second player to be sacked by Chelsea for cocaine abuse following the dismissal of Australian goalkeeper Mark Bosnich two years ago.
Chelsea chief executive Peter Kenyon said the club had targeted the Romanian because his performances were below par and he missed training.
"A clinical assessment over time led us to believe that his behaviour could be associated with drugs," Kenyon told the BBC.
The club's statement on Friday added: "We want to make clear that Chelsea has a zero tolerance policy towards drugs. This applies to both performance-enhancing drugs or so-called 'recreational' drugs. They have no place at our club or in sport.
"In coming to a decision on this case, Chelsea believed the club's social responsibility to its fans, players, employees and other stakeholders in football regarding drugs was more important than the major financial considerations to the company.
"Chelsea is actively considering all options in relation to any financial loss as a result of this case."
TAYLOR UNHAPPY
Gordon Taylor, chief executive of the Professional Footballers' Association, was unhappy with the club's treatment of Mutu.
"They have target-tested the player with a view to getting rid of him. They have not gone through proper procedures, it's very premature, he's not even had his official hearing from the FA," Taylor told Sky Sports News.
"So many clubs have adopted a more responsible duty of care to employees and been prepared to help them undertake rehabilitation and this is obviously not a programme that Chelsea want to follow and that is very disappointing."
Mutu's agent also criticised the club. "Chelsea were the only side who did not help him ," Gheorghe Popescu told Reuters.
"The English FA backed him, Gordon Taylor backed him, we also helped him, everybody helped him except for his club.
"Chelsea's attitude was not one of fair-play," added Popescu, who said the club had agreed not to make any public announcements without both parties agreeing to them beforehand.
Mutu was one of the first signings of Chelsea's billionaire owner Roman Abramovich when he joined from Parma in August 2003.
He scored four goals in his first three games to make an immediate impact on the pitch but also admitted to loving London's nightlife.
His performances began to dip and by the end of last season he had fallen out with former manager Claudio Ranieri and was on the sidelines, where he generally remained under Jose Mourinho, who took over in the close season.
Earlier this month Mutu denied taking cocaine but said he had taken "a substance to make me feel better".
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 29, 2004 18:24:37 GMT -5
Ah, I can post now! Im not suprised that Chelsea sacked Mutu really because Mourinho wanted him out anyway, they had a huge row a few weeks back. Perfect excuse to get rid? Im not sure. Shame, because Mutu is talented.
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Oct 29, 2004 18:28:18 GMT -5
Yay it works now Hmm, I'm not so sure I'm in that its-a-bit-too-perfect camp. Rehabilitation -- does it really work? I mean...why coddle these players who are being paid millions? What are the hard and fast rules if not harsh penalties for being caught with cocaine(!) in your system?
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 29, 2004 18:32:30 GMT -5
Lots of players have tried it- not just for drugs, but for being alcoholic too. Gazza, Tony Adams to name a few. Does it work? Not entirely. Mutu says he didn't take cocaine for football, obviously because its not a performance enhancing drug so Im not sure. Its different for different circumstances. A ban for sure though. Mourinho would have found a way to get rid of Mutu anyway, even if this didn;t happen.
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Oct 29, 2004 18:36:42 GMT -5
Well obviously he didn't take cocaine for his day job much like Wilander didn't do it for his. I'm just not so sure the alternative to kicking him out of the club should have been supporting him through rehab -- especially if he doesn't want to do it. Seems like a tough break to me. Do you think anything will come of all the powers that be in football being against the club?
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 29, 2004 18:38:37 GMT -5
Well, thats the thing. They probably should have supported him but I think because they wanted him out anyway they decided to sack him. Easiest option to get him off their hands.
Im not sure. But Chelsea can do whatever the hell they want because they are that powerful and they have that much money. Or is that not what you asked and I read it wrong because its late :red:
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Oct 29, 2004 18:43:12 GMT -5
Well, thats the thing. They probably should have supported him but I think because they wanted him out anyway they decided to sack him. Easiest option to get him off their hands. Eh, learn something new everyday Yeah, that's what I asked I knew Chelsea was big but I didn't know how big.
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 29, 2004 18:47:19 GMT -5
Eh, learn something new everyday Yeah, that's what I asked I knew Chelsea was big but I didn't know how big. All depends on how much you want to keep the player and what your plans for the future are with him. Mutu was out of favour and labelled as a trouble maker. Ok. Well, ever since Abramovic took over they are huge. Moneywise anyway. They could buy anyone and anything.
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Oct 31, 2004 17:07:01 GMT -5
From the newly completely-tabloided London Times ;D
Mutu 'lied' - Chelsea chief Chelsea chief executive Peter Kenyon insisted his club had no option but to sack Adrian Mutu over his failed drugs test and denied there was any vendetta to force the Romanian striker out of Stamford Bridge. Mutu tested positive for an illegal substance and Chelsea, as they did with Australian goalkeeper Mark Bosnich, sacked the player. Kenyon claimed that Mutu rejected offers of assistance from the club and lied to his employers, leaving Chelsea with no option but to terminate his contract for "gross misconduct".
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Oct 31, 2004 17:09:47 GMT -5
Ahhh.....the stories go on and on ;D I doubt anyone will ever know the truth besides those at Chelsea.
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Nov 5, 2004 0:08:22 GMT -5
Chelsea attack FA over Mutu ban Seven months for striker is 'lenient' and 'weak on drugs' Jon Brodkin and Paul Kelso Friday November 5, 2004 The Guardian
Chelsea last night strongly criticised the Football Association for handing Adrian Mutu a seven-month ban for a failed drug test, calling it "far too lenient" and accusing the governing body of being "weak over the issue of drugs".
Chelsea's sideswipe comes after they sacked Mutu last week for gross misconduct. The club now seem likely to begin legal proceedings to recoup some or all of the £12m at which the striker is valued in their accounts. They may attempt to claim that amount from the player or the club who next take him on.
Mutu should be free to resume his club career next season, although Chelsea could seek to hold on to his registration until any compensation claim has been resolved. The 25-year-old's suspension will end on May 18 provided he undergoes the required rehabiliation and education and proves clean during the target tests which will run throughout his ban.
Chelsea feel the FA should have given the Romanian a much harsher punishment. The maximum penalty would have been a two-year ban.
The club's stance was greeted with dismay inside Soho Square. Officials there consider the chief executive Peter Kenyon's remarks grossly unfair and the FA reacted by backing the disciplinary panel and stressing its anti-drug commitment, saying it took doping control matters "extremely seriously".
"We conduct more tests than any other sport in the UK and we have been acclaimed for this," it said. "The FA believe that it is important to balance rehabilitation and education with suspension, when appropriate, in cases of players who accept wrongdoing after failing a drugs test."
The FA was always expected to give Mutu a ban of about the minimum of six months, partly because he took cocaine rather than a performance- enhancing substance and also because he accepted his guilt and has started rehabilitation.
Moreover, it would have been difficult to ban him for more than the eight months that Rio Ferdinand incurred for missing a test because that would have set a dangerous precedent, effectively offering an incentive for players to miss tests if they feared a positive result.
Mark Bosnich was given nine months for testing positive for cocaine but Mutu, unlike the former Chelsea goalkeeper, cooperated with the panel.
Gordon Taylor, the chief executive of the Professional Footballers' Association, said: "You would have thought even Chelsea might be glad to have him back on track and carrying on with his career."
However, there is a feeling at Stamford Bridge that Mutu has used the system to escape with the shortest possible ban, admitting his guilt only when it suited him. And according to a leading sports lawyer, their criticism of the FA needs to be seen in context.
"A more severe sentence would help Chelsea in claiming compensation for the millions they have spent on this player, because their loss is greater because the matter is a serious one," said Ian Blackshaw. "Their claim would be greater because they had to let this player go because of his misconduct." He added Mutu could sue Chelsea for unfair dismissal, using the seven-month ban as evidence that his conduct was not a serious breach of contract.
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Nov 5, 2004 7:40:05 GMT -5
Chelsea What should it matter to them, they sacked him!! Anyway, the reason he only has 7 months is highlighted in this para: "The FA was always expected to give Mutu a ban of about the minimum of six months, partly because he took cocaine rather than a performance- enhancing substance and also because he accepted his guilt and has started rehabilitation." He'll be able to play again next season!! There are supposed to be a few English clubs after him, Arsenal being one of them
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Nov 5, 2004 10:55:48 GMT -5
Well, here's Chelsea's motivation for sticking there noses in where it doesn't belong. "A more severe sentence would help Chelsea in claiming compensation for the millions they have spent on this player, because their loss is greater because the matter is a serious one," said Ian Blackshaw. "Their claim would be greater because they had to let this player go because of his misconduct." He added Mutu could sue Chelsea for unfair dismissal, using the seven-month ban as evidence that his conduct was not a serious breach of contract. It's all about the £££. There's nothing new under the sun.
|
|
|
Post by ILR on Nov 5, 2004 11:51:02 GMT -5
They dont need any more money!! Grrrr. Talk about greedy.
|
|
|
Post by TennisHack on Dec 16, 2004 18:23:47 GMT -5
Fans evacuated after bomb scareFrom correspondents in Madrid, Spain 13dec04 www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5478,11673531%255E1702,00.html MORE than 70,000 fans were forced to evacuate Real Madrid's Santiago Bernabeu stadium after a bomb scare today. It came in the name of ETA Basque separatist guerrillas and forced the game with Real Sociedad to be abandoned three minutes from time. The decision to stop the game was taken after Basque newspaper Gara said it received a warning from a caller claiming to represent ETA that there was a bomb in the ground. The caller said the bomb would explode at 9pm but the warning proved false. Police with sniffer dogs searched the stadium and found no bomb. "The police have said they have completed their search and have not found anything," said Real Madrid president Florentino Perez. "The best thing we can all do now is to put this nightmare behind us." Real Madrid's star-studded team, including Brazil's Ronaldo and England's David Beckham, suddenly trooped off the pitch with the score tied at 1-1 with a team from San Sebastian in the Basque country. An announcement over the public address system told the crowd to leave. Spectators left the stadium in an orderly way, clearing the ground in less than 15 minutes. Hundreds streamed across the pitch on their way to the exits. Outside, a few people could be seen in tears due to nerves but emergency officials said no one had been treated for any injury. The police ordered the evacuation because their priority was to ensure the safety of everyone in the ground, the Interior Ministry said in a statement. Some of the players left the ground in their kit but were later allowed back to the changing room. The Spanish football federation will meet today to decide whether to let the result stand or play the remaining minutes of the game later. If the result remains at 1-1, Real will drop to fourth in the Primera Liga, 11 points behind leaders Barcelona. ETA has targeted the Bernabeu stadium before. In May 2002, an ETA car bomb exploded nearby hours before a European Champions League semi-final and 17 people were treated for shock or slight injuries. ETA warned of that attack in a call to Gara. The last week has seen a resurgence of violence by ETA after months of relative inactivity. ETA set off bombs in seven cities across Spain on Monday, slightly wounding five people on Constitution Day, the day Spaniards celebrate unity. Three days before that, co-ordinated ETA bombings at five Madrid service stations marked the first attack on the capital in two years. The bombings showed ETA remained capable of high-profile attacks despite more than 100 arrests this year, including the capture of the group's leader in France two months ago. ETA, Western Europe's most active armed militant group and listed as terrorist by the European Union, has killed nearly 850 since 1968 in a bombing and shooting campaign for Basque independence from Spain and France. Meanwhile, Real took the lead just before the break through Ronaldo. Sociedad equalised midway through the second-half when Turkish striker Nihat smashed home with an acrobatic finish. Earlier, Valencia had put their European woes behind them to notch their fourth Primera Liga win in a row with a 1-0 victory at home to basement side Numancia. Centre-half Carlos Marchena headed the winner after 21 minutes. The win put Claudio Ranieri's side – who exited the Champions League midweek – into provisional second spot in the table, 10 points behind leaders Barcelona who snatched a late 2-1 win away to Albacete on Saturday. Deportivo Coruna, who exited the Champions League group phase without scoring a goal after their 5-0 defeat against Monaco on Wednesday, were only able to manage a 2-2 draw at home to Sevilla, a result that left them in eighth place in the table. Uruguayan striker Richard Morales scored his fifth goal in five games when he put Osasuna ahead against Real Zaragoza in the fourth minute at El Sadar, but the Navarrans ended up drawing the match 2-2.
|
|