Tevez Apologizes for Conduct, Abandons Appeal Against Manchester City Fine
Manchester City striker Carlos Tevez apologized for his conduct following a touchline disagreement with manager Roberto Mancini last year that led to him leaving the team for three months without permission.
Tevez also withdrew his appeal against City’s fine of six weeks wages for gross misconduct, which was to be heard by a Premier League panel in the next few days, according to a statement last night on the club’s website.
“I wish to apologize sincerely and unreservedly to everybody I have let down and to whom my actions over the last few months have caused offense,” Tevez said in the statement. “My wish is to concentrate on playing football for Manchester City Football Club.”
Tevez, 28, reported back to the club last week after failing to secure a move during the January trade period. He was suspended with full pay on Sept. 28 pending a probe after Mancini said the striker refused to go on as a substitute during the second half of a Champions League game at Bayern Munich the previous day. He then went back to his native Argentina without permission for three months and was fined six weeks wages for gross misconduct in December.
Tevez, City’s leading goal scorer the past two seasons, was linked with moves to AC Milan, Inter Milan, Paris Saint-Germain and Brazil’s Corinthians while he was away, though City was unable to secure a deal. He was given a specially designed training program last week to help him get back into shape to earn a first-team place.
City leads the Premier League by two points ahead of Manchester United. The club is also in the round of 32 in the Europa League, where it takes a 2-1 lead over Porto into tonight’s home leg, after exiting the elite Champions League at the group stage.
To contact the reporter on this story: Bob Bensch in London at email@example.com
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Christopher Elser at firstname.lastname@example.org
Bloomberg reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.