Questioned by Julien Fournier, Christophe Galtier did not want to see his players perform Ramadan on match days.
The war between Christophe Galtier and Julien Fournier has taken a new turn since Wednesday. Consequence of the heavy accusations made by the former director of football in Nice against the one who was the coach of the Aiglons last season. We knew the two men were cold and Julien Fournier returned, at the microphone of RMC Sport, to these conflicting relationships.
« Quite honestly, if I explain the real reasons why Christophe and I had a fight – because that’s really the word – Christophe will no longer go into a locker room either in France or in Europe. “, he launched, assuring that their differences were not related to football: “ it’s related to football, indirectly linked to football, because we work in a football club, but this something that touched me deeply, it’s something where Christophe, me or even the president had very distant. »
He feared his players were weakened
According to Mohamed Bezzouaoui and The team, it is the question of Ramadan which would have opposed the two men, the first evoking “a ban on players to do Ramadan”, which would have caused conflicts with his locker room. Confirmation therefore in The teamwho explains that Christophe Galtier would have judged that several of his players must fast and therefore be weakened on match days while OGC Nice was going through a difficult period.
Christophe Galtier, who would also have changed all the locks of the training center to prevent club employees from entering the areas reserved for players, took advantage of a press conference on Thursday to deliver the background his thoughts on the words of Julien Fournier. « I’m not surprised how he expressed himself. I’m really not surprised”he launched, adding: “When you are the coach of the Paris Saint Germain you have a great exposure and I don’t want to get tired of commenting and responding to everything that is saidhe continued. The function (of PSG coach) means that we create debates one after the other. But on the form, I’m not surprised knowing the character. »
