How come Liverpool were allowed to sign Mascherano and we can't sign Tevez?

Simple Explanation please

Originally Posted by Harri Jaffa

Simple Explanation please

There isn't one of those.

Cos they would cry unfair if they weren't allowed to sign him. They have managed to get sponsorship on their shirts when it was banned and get in to the champs league without qualifying by this same tactic, it works.

I think I know the reason but i'm not sure.


Is it purely that West Ham released his registration but because they claimed Tevez was an 'appy 'ammer in the April commission they now cannot back track?


That's how I understand it anyway - Forgive me if i'm being thick

An interesting question might be, in the case of Mascherano, why didn't West Ham, as the claim to have done in the Tevez deal, tear up the 3rd party agreement with MSI and thus demanda transfer fee from Liverpool. I mean if the ridiculous idea that you can do this is true, why would West Ham throw away this fee they could've got from Liverpool.

West Ham paid a £5.5million fine last season over the Tevez/Mascherano deals and now they want some sort of fee to compensate that seeing as he is intending to leave.
Mascherano left West Ham before the fine was issued so West Ham allowed him to leave no probs as they didn't know that a record fine was on its way.

the fact is, you cannot just "tear up" an agreement ffs - it's a joke, and i don't blame joorabchian for being well and truely £#%&!ed off with the bubble blowing @#%&!s and the PL!!

Originally Posted by toseeunited

the fact is, you cannot just "tear up" an agreement ffs - it's a joke, and i don't blame joorabchian for being well and truely £#%&!ed off with the bubble blowing @#%&!s and the PL!!

Of course you can't but it's difficult to show this when the arbiters in the case are also an interested party. There is such a clear conflict of interest here for the PL it's ridiculous. Why we cannot get FIFA/UEFA involved I don't know.

Originally Posted by antonin jablonsky

An interesting question might be, in the case of Mascherano, why didn't West Ham, as the claim to have done in the Tevez deal, tear up the 3rd party agreement with MSI and thus demanda transfer fee from Liverpool. I mean if the ridiculous idea that you can do this is true, why would West Ham throw away this fee they could've got from Liverpool.

Exactly

In all honesty what really what should happen (I think) is that the PL should stop anyone from signing Tevez and investigate the Liverpool transfer and get the clear before anything moves forward.

They won't of course because it may implicate their own blunders but that's what should happen.

Originally Posted by Harri Jaffa

Exactly

In all honesty what really what should happen (I think) is that the PL should stop anyone from signing Tevez and investigate the Liverpool transfer and get the clear before anything moves forward.

They won't of course because it may implicate their own blunders but that's what should happen.

I don't think the PL should investigate anything, as I've said they have a clear conflicyt of interest here. Either an independant panel should look into it, or FIFA/UEFA should be brought in.

The deal with West Ham was a season long loan with the option of a 40 million buy-out at the end of the 'loan.' They failed to take up the option so why is he not a free agent now??

West Ham never owned Mascherano so there was no fee due to them. They still had the illegal 3rd party agreement in place. All that happened was MSI negotiated a (possibly) legal agreement with Liverpool and his registration was transferred from West Ham. There was no pressure for West Ham to get paid for him as they admitted they didn't own his economic rights. With Tevez they claim they own his economic rights because they unilaterally canceled their contract with MSI.

Bedders is totally right about the PL being in charge of this case. They can not rule independently because it will make them look stupid and show that they were wrong not to deduct West Ham points if they admit that the contract with MSI is still in force.

Originally Posted by red red robbo

West Ham never owned Mascherano so there was no fee due to them. They still had the illegal 3rd party agreement in place. All that happened was MSI negotiated a (possibly) legal agreement with Liverpool and his registration was transferred from West Ham. There was no pressure for West Ham to get paid for him as they admitted they didn't own his economic rights. With Tevez they claim they own his economic rights because they unilaterally canceled their contract with MSI.

.

Thev question there becomes, why didn't they cancekl the 3rd party contract with Mascherano, thus as if by magic owning him? They then could've got a large fee off Liverpool when he went there. The reason of course is you cannot just magically gain ownership of someone elses asset by cancelling a contract with them and the idea you can which is being pushed by the PL is a big reason that independant arbitration is necassary in this case.

Originally Posted by antonin jablonsky

Thev question there becomes, why didn't they cancekl the 3rd party contract with Mascherano, thus as if by magic owning him? They then could've got a large fee off Liverpool when he went there. The reason of course is you cannot just magically gain ownership of someone elses asset by cancelling a contract with them and the idea you can which is being pushed by the PL is a big reason that independant arbitration is necassary in this case.

Exactly. They didn't want him themselves so there was no incentive there, they had a contract with MSI, under the terms of which MSI could move him on so they let that happen.

TBH, if MSI had kicked up a bit of a fuss at the time over the contract being canceled then none of this would have happened. It was obviously in their interests to let the PL think they were no longer involved so that their man could carry on playing.

Originally Posted by antonin jablonsky

Thev question there becomes, why didn't they cancekl the 3rd party contract with Mascherano, thus as if by magic owning him? They then could've got a large fee off Liverpool when he went there. The reason of course is you cannot just magically gain ownership of someone elses asset by cancelling a contract with them and the idea you can which is being pushed by the PL is a big reason that independant arbitration is necassary in this case.

They only cancelled the contract for Tevez when they had to pay the £5.5million fine.
If there was no fine then we wouldn't have any problem now, the got rid of Mascherano when he was nothing more than a drain on the wage bill, it looks to me like West Ham are holding out for some sort of compensation from either United or Joorabchian to make up for the money they have lost.

Originally Posted by Cantona's collar

They only cancelled the contract for Tevez when they had to pay the £5.5million fine.
If there was no fine then we wouldn't have any problem now, the got rid of Mascherano when he was nothing more than a drain on the wage bill, it looks to me like West Ham are holding out for some sort of compensation from either United or Joorabchian to make up for the money they have lost.

Isn't having the use of a player whose golas kept them from relegation compensation enough?

I don't see why West Ham have to receive a transfer fee. Afterall, they didn't pay one did they. Surely MSI could act as Tevez's agent and get paid an agents fee accordingly. This fee will of course be undisclosed so the PL won't know how much it is so can't complain.

Originally Posted by red red robbo

Isn't having the use of a player whose golas kept them from relegation compensation enough?

I don't see why West Ham have to receive a transfer fee. Afterall, they didn't pay one did they. Surely MSI could act as Tevez's agent and get paid an agents fee accordingly. This fee will of course be undisclosed so the PL won't know how much it is so can't complain.

Quite right, West Ham took the risk and payed the price, they deserve £#%&! all.
Its a pity they don't see it that way, they probably see it as paying over 6million (fine plus his wages) for a player and getting nothing back when he leaves.

Originally Posted by red red robbo

Bedders is totally right about the PL being in charge of this case. They can not rule independently because it will make them look stupid and show that they were wrong not to deduct West Ham points if they admit that the contract with MSI is still in force.

haven't they already been shown to be wrong not to have deducted points?

and the whole ripping up the contract thing is %@#$&!s. how pissed off would we have been if parma had tried to sell rossi?

why don't we get Tevez on loan?