Tevez set to sue Roberto Mancini for defamation of character

The development raises the extraordinary and unprecedented prospect of both men — and other players and officials at City — having to go to the High Court to give evidence.

It is, potentially, a case that could cost millions of pounds to settle given the value of the player and the damage, also, that Tévez feels has been done to his reputation and career by Mancini’s allegations.

The 27-year-old striker is adamant that his only offence was a refusal to warm up again, having already done so during the second half of the match, and it’s believed that he considers the findings of City’s disciplinary hearing against him, published on Tuesday night, help vindicate his stance. If Tévez takes legal action, it will be against Mancini rather than City.

Tévez will appeal the decision, in any case, and is determined that the issue is dealt with by an independent Premier League tribunal. If he carries through his threat of legal action it could mean that the case is not fully resolved until deep into next year.

It is understood that despite being fined four weeks’ wages by the City-convened tribunal yesterday after being found guilty of five counts of misconduct over what happened in Munich, Tévez believes that the body’s findings actually support his case against Mancini. 

This is partly because of the apparent failure to fully back Mancini’s allegation on the night — in his press conference and also to television cameras — that Tévez refused to come on as a substitute. It may be argued by City that it is a case of semantics — separating out a refusal to play from a refusal to warm up — but Tévez is adamant there is a difference especially on a confused and heated evening on the City substitutes bench.

He was told of his punishment on Tuesday night in a letter sent to him by Graham Wallace, City’s chief operating officer and also the man selected to chair the internal inquiry into his behaviour. In his letter, Wallace wrote: “My decision is that in full view you refused to carry out instructions given to you by Mancini and Ivan Carminati [City’s fitness coach] to resume warming up with a view to playing in the match... and you are thereby guilty of misconduct.”

Tévez will argue that this simply endorses his claim that he did, indeed, refuse to warm up again — although he then argues that he did try and do so but was told not to by City’s coaching staff. He will claim that none of the 15 witness statements gathered by the club supports Mancini’s assertion that he was refusing to play.

On the night, Mancini alleged: “He [Tévez] refuses to go in. He refused to come on the pitch. What I said to Carlos is between me, him and the team [but] I’m really disappointed because it is Carlos. I decide the changes.”

Tévez now has 14 days to decide whether he will appeal the decision — which he seems certain to do — and then the case will go to a further hearing of a freshly convened City board. That will probably include a representative of the club’s owners, the Abu Dhabi United Group. After that it can go to the Premier League which is not expected to hear the case until mid-December. Manchester City declined to comment on Tuesday night.