Manchester City: Carlos Tevez Will Win the Pre-Season Power Struggle

An epic power struggle between Man City's manager and their most outstanding player looks set to overshadow the Champions League chasing side's pre-season.

The uneasy relationship between recently appointed Man City manager Roberto Mancini and star striker Carlos Tevez has exploded into open antipathy in recent weeks. Both men have been putting their contrasting points of view across in the back pages of the British media.

Mancini's frustrations with the striker first emerged in February. Tevez failed to return to the club sufficiently quickly for the managers liking after his wife gave birth to a premature baby in his native Argentina causing Mancini to complain,

"He is in Argentina and it's a big problem because we have an important week. We don't have any depth and, for me, it is not good. Carlos went eight days ago and I don't know if, while he is in Argentina, he has been working [on his fitness]. I hope that Carlos comes back within two days. I have ordered him to come back and I hope in the next few days he can come back."

Tevez did eventually return and has been on a rich vein of scoring form ever since. He has 29 goals to his name already this season and has emerged as the jewel in Man City's expensively assembled crown.

Man City appear on the verge of securing the coveted Champions League place and all should be well at Eastlands. Despite this, Tevez recently felt the need to make his displeasure with Mancini's training regime known. Tevez, according to former teammate Rio Ferdinand, has a tendency to conserve his energy in training and did not appreciate being asked to train twice a day by Mancini,

"The players are not happy with this. We are at the end of a long season, we have big matches, we are tired but there are still double training sessions, morning and afternoon. Then, the next day, we train for two hours. I do not understand."

Mancini responded by claiming that the team were only expected to do a double training session when there was not a mid-week fixture and had some harsh words for his side's leading goalscorer,

"Tevez has four years left on his contract but I don't know, if he's not happy it's better to change squads. It's important that when a manager or player works in a team, he must be happy. If he's not, it's not good for the club, for the squad, or for the player."

The message to Tevez from Mancini is clear, "if you don't like it you can leave." Man City's owners, however, might feel a little differently about the situation. They allegedly paid £47 million for him last summer and would be unlikely to recoup more than around half of this figure if they were to sell him on now.

Regardless of financial considerations, Man City will not be at all inclined to cut their losses on a player who was signed in a blaze of publicity less than 12 months ago and has had an outstanding debut season at Eastlands.

In an interview prior to the Manchester derby, Tevez criticized the club's decision to dismiss Mark Hughes and to use his image for an inflammatory poster campaign soon after the move from Man Utd. It has been the existing manager though, rather than the club itself, who has born the brunt of his recent criticism and it is becoming increasingly apparent that Mancini may have to be sacrificed if Man City are to appease the irascible Argentinian.

While Tevez's contribution to the cause has been nothing short of superlative, Mancini has merely achieved the bare minimum since being controversially appointed at the expense of Mark Hughes. There is no doubt that the club will embark on a mammoth pre-season spending spree this summer but the board may no longer feel that Mancini is the man to mastermind it.

When asked about his Eastland's future recently Tevez replied emphatically,

"All the good things that are happening to me this season, I owe to City and my teammates. There is no doubt in my mind I was right to come here."

Mancini, by contrast, was a little less pronounced when asked whether he felt his immediate future lay in Manchester,

"Have I been given any assurances? No. But I have three years left on my contract and I want us to be an important team next year."

It seems the time will come when the Man City board has to choose between these two men and few in football will be surprised if it is the player, rather than the manager, who emerges victorious in this particular power struggle.