Can Carlos Tevez Learn From The History Of Player Power?

With all this talk about Carlos Tevez and his Rambo-like one man war against the powers that be at Manchester City, I thought it would be good idea to look back at past player v club disputes to see if the past can give us an idea of what the outcome of Mr Tevez's war will be.

William Gallas - Chelsea

We all know that William Gallas is a volatile character at the best of times, but his behaviour before leaving Chelsea was shocking even for his standards.

Gallas' contract was due to expire at the end of the season and when Chelsea offered him an extension it wasn't to the defenders liking. Following this he started working on finding his way out of Chelsea as quickly as possible.

He failed to turn up for pre-season training which Chelsea were holding in Los Angeles during a tour of the United States. This was after a transfer request he handed to the club was rejected as he was seen as too important to the club. His manager at the time Jose Mourinho responded to his behaviour by saying "It's not only me that is upset - we're all upset," said Mourinho. "Everybody is upset because we had a strong family and a strong group and this has shown a lack of respect to everybody and I don't like that." So he  alienated his teammates and managers which made his position untenable at the club and made a move away from the club a real possibility.

Following Gallas' move to Arsenal stories were emanating from Stamford Bridge that Gallas threatened to score own goals if he was in the starting line up for Chelsea's match against Manchester City for the first game of the 2006-2007 season. Gallas went on to deny he made these comments but I'm a believer that there's no smoke without fire...

In the end Chelsea did benefit from selling a player they were so hell bent on keeping. They brought in Ashley Cole as part of the deal for selling Gallas. Gallas has gone on to win nothing since he left Chelsea.

Pierre Van Hooijdonk - Nottingham Forest

He joined Nottingham Forest in 1997 when they were in relegation trouble and he was deemed by many as their saviour from relegation. The plan didn't work and they went down...

Van Hooijdonk promised he would stay at the club and help them back the Premier League. He did this by scoring 34 goals and forming a formidable partnership with Kevin Campbell (remember him?).

After promotion is where it started going wrong for PVH at Forest. The club sold strike partner Campbell, Club Captain Colin Cooper and refused to play key midfielder Scott Gemmil after he refused to sign a new contract. Enough was enough, PVH felt the club had gone back on promises made to him about allowing him to leave the club after promotion or about making new signings to help the club stay up (those are the two main reasons given), he decided to go on strike.

This was a time when clubs generally had power over their players unlike the current climate where player power reigns supreme. He missed the first 11 games of the season during which he refused to play and spent most of his time in Holland. The Club didn't give in to his demands and refused to sell him during the season, PVH did in the end give up and played a few games for Forest, but this didn't help much...

Nottingham Forest ended up relegated and PVH managed to jump ship and moved to Dutch outfit Vitesse Arnhem. But this curious tale didn't end there PVH did return to the club... To sue it for unpaid bonuses, the clubs response to this was to release a statement saying, "The club intends a counter-claim based on the damage the player inflicted on his own transfer value by taking strike action and his inability to perform during his final season at the City Ground." This case ended up in an out of court settlement for PVH...

In the end Forest did manage to keep the player even after he went on strike. But the question is was it worth it? If they had sold him at the time of his strike he would've brought in a handsome fee because they didn't he left for a cut price and came back to haunt the club in the courts.

Nicolas Anelka - Arsenal

This is the man who became know as "Le Sulk" after his and his agent (who is also his brother) antics in order to engineer a move to Real Madrid.

It all started in May 1999, the President of French Club Olympique de Marseille complained publicly that Anelka was continuously calling his club asking for them to sign him. Seven days later Anelka's agents were in talks with Real Madrid's...

With his brothers touting him across Europe to clubs which included Juventus, Lazio and Real Madrid. Arsenal tried to retain his services but only to hear Anelka come our publicly and say "My priority is to join Real Madrid but if that does not work out why not Lazio? I prefer that than to return to Arsenal," Just in case anyone is still wondering, He wanted to leave...Just in case the Arsenal Board missed this he went on to accuse the of making an illegal approach from him while he was at Paris St Germain.

Following this to ensure he is allowed to move Anelka threatens to strike, releasing a statement through his agent saying "Arsenal must hurry if they want to conclude a deal - if not Nicolas will stay a year without playing. That's no problem," This isn't exactly the most civil way of handing in a transfer request.

In the end Anelka and his agents managed to arrange a transfer to Real Madrid which cost the Spanish giants 23.5 million pounds and Anelka a decent career as he went on to move between numerous clubs around Europe.

Goran Pandev & Cristian Ledesma - Lazio

Well this is a strange one, these two players were key players at Lazio at the time. Problems arose when both players were running down. With Pandev the problem was that he declared he wanted to leave the club and with Ledesma it was over the financial aspects of a new contract. Both refused to refused to sign new contracts.

Both players were frozen out of the first team by the clubs owner Claudio Lotito. He branded both of them rebels and refused to sell either, he even rejected a €13,000,000 bid for Pandev from Zenit St Petersburg. Now what the difference between the two players was, was the difference in their responses to the situation.

Pandev who was attracting interest from various European clubs stuck to his guns and went to the footballing courts in Italy. He felt that he was unfairly treated and that Lazio had breached the contract he has signed with them. He also went further and requested that Lazio terminate his contract. In the end the courts ruled in Pandev's favour and ordered Lazio to release him and on top of that pay him €170,000 for emotional distress. After this he went on to join rivals Inter Milan and win the European Cup the following season.

With Ledesma it was a different story, he had a successful first season at Lazio but no-one really showed much interest in him leaving him with no way out. Once this was obvious he back tracked on his refusal to sign a new contract, which was rejected by Lotito who withdrew the contract offer he had originally put forward. When his case went to court, the club said that due to his willingness to accept a new contract Ledesma was making himself available for first team duties but the coach didn't pick him for "tactical reasons".

In the end Ledesma was put in position where he had to sign a new contract and Pandev was allowed to leave the club. I feel this example at Lazio shows that player power without direction can be controlled.

Conclusion

Well after those examples I hope that Carlitos sees that throwing the toys out of the pram works in the short term but it isn't always the best thing to do. I mean so far the hierarchy have been understanding with regards to his homesickness by giving him leave so he can see his children in Argentina. But if it comes down to it with the wealth City have at their disposal, it would be a drop in the ocean to allow him to rot in the reserves until his contract expires (a bit like the Lazio incident). But I feel that in the end this might just be a bit of Rooney-like posturing for a new contract. If this isn't the case I feel Tevez may have bitten of more than he can chew.