EPL Villain of the Week: Javier Mascherano
Hello Premiership fans and welcome to another edition of the Premiership Villain of The Week.
Following another weekend of one sided affairs and a shock draw by Premiership contenders; the last fixture of the week was supposed to be a clash of heavyweight sides in Manchester City and a supposedly rejuvenated Liverpool side.
Both teams drew against their likeliest contenders to a spot in the Top Four in Tottenham and Arsenal last week and both wanted to make big impressions on matchday two.
Unfortunately for the Red faithful, it was all Sky Blue.
Manchester City dominated the game and got an easy 3-0 victory with a brace from Carlos Tevez and another goal from Gareth Barry.
While a result like this was unlikely, the biggest drama unfolded before the game when Javier Mascherano declared to manager Roy Hodgson that he would not be competing because he wants to move to Barcelona.
Now transfer desires are something that have become more and more frequent the past few seasons, with Manchester City as one of the clubs that caused the most trouble, but for a player to not even suit up and play while under contract is an absolutely horrendous act that shows a profound lack of professionalism.
This is not something that one has come to expect from a player that often does the dirty work on the field and screens the defense so that his teammates can chase glory on the final third of the pitch.
No, Javier Mascherano has been a consummate professional and footballer his entire career.
On Monday, however, he decided to abandon his teammates and manager out of a petulance over a contract dispute.
While this does happen in America with contract hold outs, Mascherano just played a week earlier and delivered a masterclass on what it means to be a defensive midfielder.
So for abandoning his professional responsibilities and leaving his teammates high and dry, Javier Mascherano is the Premiership Villain of the Week.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?