I don"t disagree with you. It's not enough for releasing a player unless there's an underlying issue. Also have no idea if he was moved on simply for that - he certainly could make a claim for payout of his contract if he was. Plus we don't know if he received any disciplinary action for anything & if he did whether he tried to comply or didn't. The little some have said is the reason doesn't fit the club's move on the face of it. But I would also expect that an organization would have to have good cause or pay up.Okay what you're now describing sounds like disciplinary action. 'Refusing to get with the programme' and 'willfully not trying'. Even then that’s almost impossible grounds to argue. I’m sure every club would argue their most overpaid player isn’t trying.
That's very different to failing some fitness KPI's which sounds more likely from what George said in that interview. I've never seen that alone as grounds to be able to terminate a contract with nil financial repercussions.
But coming from someone who's seen a lot of player contracts through club audits, we can just agree to disagree.