13.68m according to the BBC. I feel a bit for him because I felt like he was doomed when Jose came in by hook or by crook, but he made his choices and im glad we got that money back

So (hopefully) ends one of the most disappointing player sagas I have experienced. I loved Mutu and wanted him to thrive. I dont think it ends any worse than this.

I dont think it ends any worse than this.

it does if your Mutu

hopefully this will end now, but i see it been dragged through the courts for a good few years with appeals by both sides, and end up with both parties paying more to solicitors, in Mutu's case it might be cheaper in the long run just to cough up, and wht chelsea make from it will pay there legal expenses, so theres no point really

it does if your Mutu

hopefully this will end now, but i see it been dragged through the courts for a good few years with appeals by both sides, and end up with both parties paying more to solicitors, in Mutu's case it might be cheaper in the long run just to cough up, and wht chelsea make from it will pay there legal expenses, so theres no point really

If we were a smaller club with a tight budget we could spend the money for a player but that is not the case now is it.. :P

I dont agree with this at all!

We terminated his contract instead of holding on to him and helping him get out of his situation.

Recently QPR had Clark Carlisle he was on the booze and the sniff and the club stuck by him.

The club should take some responsibilty,they chuck vast sums of money at young men and expect them not to make mistakes!

He was brilliant for two months,then he got injured,split up with his mrs and child and his head was turned.

Fair enough,he breached a contract and we terminated it.

If he ever comes back to the Bridge he should expect a mouthfull of abuse from us.

But let the man get on with his life!!

Wow.

I actually feel kinda bad about this. Loved Mutu and really enjoyed watching him play in the Euros.

But still, he was well out of line and this will set a good example at least, plus the money is a nice bonus.

How on earth is he ever going to afford it though?

Edited August 14, 200816 yr by blizeH

£13.68m! that's not to be sniffed at.

poor adrian will be paying through the nose.

I dont agree with this at all!

We terminated his contract instead of holding on to him and helping him get out of his situation.

Recently QPR had Clark Carlisle he was on the booze and the sniff and the club stuck by him.

The club should take some responsibilty,they chuck vast sums of money at young men and expect them not to make mistakes!

He was brilliant for two months,then he got injured,split up with his mrs and child and his head was turned.

Fair enough,he breached a contract and we terminated it.

If he ever comes back to the Bridge he should expect a mouthfull of abuse from us.

But let the man get on with his life!!

This is exactly how I used to feel. Then i brought myself fully up to speed on the details surrounding Mutu's time here.

I dont exactly know what is 100% truth in the matter, and im wary putting stock in what either party says, but everyone knows Adrian was fond of London's party lifestyle, had that rondevouz with the Romanian porn star, and was caught for driving like a mad man in the city. From those facts alone, I find it hard to believe that the club was fully taken by surprise when he tested positive.

If we accept that the club realized he might be dabbling in drugs during his long nights, then I think it would be fair to assume they would try to protect their asset by offering him help. Mourinho and others have stated that Mutu was asked repeatedly behind closed doors at the club if he had a problem, and if he did, to admit to it and seek some kind of therapy. He denied that he was taking illegal substances whenever questioned. The club's next move should have been to ask him to take an internal drug test themselves or face being transfered. But there is only so much you can say to a grown, adult man, before it becomes an unprofessional invasion of his privacy.

Add to that the fact that Jose came in, and he and Mutu were at eachother from the get-go. Sometimes I know club medical results were blurred to prevent players from risking further injury. But if the doctors at the club said "Mutu is injured" and Jose said "ok, he wont play for Romania", then you would assume that would be that. Unless the player himself goes to the media and blurts it all over the backpage that his manager is keeping him at the club.

When Chelsea sacked him, I doubt anyone foresaw a day four years later where he would be forced to pay a huge sum back for his misbehavior. Clearly, they were so frustrated and disappointed with him that they were willing to cast of a 25 million euro investment for absolutely nothing. Assuming the club isnt run by a bunch of total nitwits (sometimes seems like it, I know) and this was the first inkling they had of Mutu being a drug user, I can almost understand and sympathize with their anger with him.

I wanted him to work out too, and I really liked him as a player. Its a damn shame, but he threw his chance away when he was on the verge of the big time. And he very probably lied to people who had made him a very rich man to protect his pride/image. Then he got cut, banned, and skipped off to Italy the first chance he got, totally free of consequence. Sorry, but Mutu bears most of the blame, and im glad he wont get off scot free.

I think the decision was right, otherwise it would have set a pretty poor precedent.

Whether we could afford to completely write off his 15 million transfer fee is pretty much irrelavent. These types of decisions don't just effect us, they effect other clubs the next time someone does the same thing. And a lot of other clubs aren't in our financial position, and can't afford to pay big money to a player, only to have them break their contract.

If all you had to do to walk out of your 4 year contract with a club was snort a bit of coke, only to sign with someone you would rather play for less than 6 months later, then players would do it all the time.

The fact of the matter is that we invested 15 million in Mutu, who then unilaterally broke his contract with us. It is only fair that we should be compensated for that - especially as he slunk back to Italy at the first opportunity, and was picked up on a free transfer.

We didn't really have an option NOT to sack him. If there was a clause in his contract that he would be terminated if he tested positive to drugs, then you have to act on that. I don't know if that is a standard cluase for all our players, or whether it was put in to Mutu's contract because we thought it was a bit more of a possibility with him.

The fact is that he knew the rules and willingly broke them. And there is a big possibilty that he deliberately broke the rules to get out of his contract because of his relationship with Mourinho. So I don't have a lot of sympathy.

It's a shame that Mutu didn't work out for us. However we need to move on. My first thought was what a great bit of business the club is having in the close season. Enough money coming in for a Robinho bid ;)

I dont agree with this at all!

We terminated his contract instead of holding on to him and helping him get out of his situation.

Recently QPR had Clark Carlisle he was on the booze and the sniff and the club stuck by him.

The club should take some responsibilty,they chuck vast sums of money at young men and expect them not to make mistakes!

He was brilliant for two months,then he got injured,split up with his mrs and child and his head was turned.

Fair enough,he breached a contract and we terminated it.

If he ever comes back to the Bridge he should expect a mouthfull of abuse from us.

But let the man get on with his life!!

but chelsea did offer him help. from what i heard chelsea asked him if he was in any kind of trouble, or was on any drugs. he said no and carried on. they asked him again and offered him help if he admitted the problem. he said no. he failed a drugs test, chelsea sacked him. and rightly bloody so. i guarantee if i failed a drugs test at my place of work (and we do have them) id be of site before the comedown kicked in because i was in breach of contract, same as mutu was.

Edited August 15, 200816 yr by dkw

The whole thing is a bit pointless though isn't it as irrespective of how well footballers are paid Mutu does not have £13m in the bank to pay Chelsea so we are never going to see anything like that kind of money.

when we turned to the fifa we did not ask for a specific amount of money, the club only stated that mutu was valued for £13m in our books. 2 months ago fifa decided that mutu should pay £9.6m, after an obvious appeal they have now raised it to £13.68m.

who's stupid enough to pay this amount of money just because fifa said so? i'm pretty sure that this case far from closed.

The whole thing is a bit pointless though isn't it as irrespective of how well footballers are paid Mutu does not have £13m in the bank to pay Chelsea so we are never going to see anything like that kind of money.

i dont think it is about the money though. its the principal of it. it shows that chelsea fc wont accept the actions of mutu. the amount was set by a court, not us. and if makes players consider there actions, then its been more than useful.

The whole thing is a bit pointless though isn't it as irrespective of how well footballers are paid Mutu does not have £13m in the bank to pay Chelsea so we are never going to see anything like that kind of money.

Good point, I reckon the board should have requested that he make a large donation to a drugs charity as we don't need the money and it would be pretty decent PR to boot.

It sends a good message to Real Madrid. They can't expect us to pay over the top for Robinho when we're suing an ex-player for money.

Don't feel anything for Mutu though. The club paid 22 million euros for him and then his cocaine binge meant he couldn't play out his contract, on top of which we couldn't get any money on the Juventus transfer. Talk about professional responsibility.

Too many people take us too lightly. Let this be a lesson.

Edited August 16, 200816 yr by nofizzleforshizzle