So does anyone actually understand the Tevez-West Ham deal?

for £#%&! sake mods don't even merge the threads properly. 3 threads totally mixed up

Originally Posted by antonin jablonsky

I haven't a clue???? As far as I remember they didn't pay a transfer fee for him last Autumn so how would they be entitled to a fee for him now? Was he on loan with them? If so on loan from who? What the £#%&! is the Gordon Durie?

I don't think they will be getting a transfer fee.

MSI own the player. They moved him to West Ham on a contract, but they own his rights and it is they, not West Ham, that United will be dealing with at the moment. Unless they allowed West Ham a small percentage (I doubt they did) of Tevez's contract when they parked him there, then there really is little West Ham can do to stop MSI moving him on to wherever they like.

I'm not sure, but I think that was the rule they broke. They insisted that there was no third party influence at their club. Obviously, if a third party owns your best player, that is a pretty strong influence.

Originally Posted by sharath

for £#%&! sake mods don't even merge the threads properly. 3 threads totally mixed up

And the milk is always warm

bloody jews, always complaining .

Originally Posted by S/Side.Red

I don't think they will be getting a transfer fee.

MSI own the player. They moved him to West Ham on a contract, but they own his rights and it is they, not West Ham, that United will be dealing with at the moment. Unless they allowed West Ham a small percentage (I doubt they did) of Tevez's contract when they parked him there, then there really is little West Ham can do to stop MSI moving him on to wherever they like.

I'm not sure, but I think that was the rule they broke. They insisted that there was no third party influence at their club. Obviously, if a third party owns your best player, that is a pretty strong influence.

But then West Ham claimed to have got rid of any link with that 3rd party, essentially gaining a free player?

Originally Posted by antonin jablonsky

But then West Ham claimed to have got rid of any link with that 3rd party, essentially gaining a free player?

Did you not read the BBC article

The bit west ham got into trouble for was that at any point MRI could pull the two players from west ham as long as they paid west ham a nominal fee. This is classed as 3rd party influence in the fact that MRI might have a deal lined up with another team and decide to pull the player before west ham played his new team therefor giving a unfair advantage. It is this element of the contract that west ham changed when they were found out and hence why he was allowed to play on

Originally Posted by antonin jablonsky

But then West Ham claimed to have got rid of any link with that 3rd party, essentially gaining a free player?

Another lie, I think it's safe to say. They do not own Tevez.

Originally Posted by antonin jablonsky

But then West Ham claimed to have got rid of any link with that 3rd party, essentially gaining a free player?

West Ham lied, obviously. Why would they have been fined otherwise ?

Originally Posted by 24hr Leavesey

West Ham lied, obviously. Why would they have been fined otherwise ?

Your getting a little confused.

The original contract was deemed to be against Premier League Rules. West Ham lied when they originally registered the player. They were fined and they changed the agreement (without the other parties permision) and the premier league were satisifed and allow Tevez to play for the rest of the season.

They have not been fined for lieing about tearing up the agreement.

Originally Posted by phil_mckrakin

Your getting a little confused.

The original contract was deemed to be against Premier League Rules. West Ham lied when they originally registered the player. They were fined and they changed the agreement (without the other parties permision) and the premier league were satisifed and allow Tevez to play for the rest of the season.

They have not been fined for lieing about tearing up the agreement.

But they would be lying if they have said that they currently own or have the right to dictate where Tevez plays next season.

Perhaps not a rule-breaking lie, but %@#$&!s nonetheless.

Originally Posted by antonin jablonsky

But then West Ham claimed to have got rid of any link with that 3rd party, essentially gaining a free player?

The inference from the BBC article is that the agreement was never really scrapped. West Ham say it was, but Kia Ora implies that it wasn't and that his lawyers are dealing with it.

However as the Premiership can't make him speak to them, they have no option but to take West ham's word for it for now. So in other words he holds all the cards, as he can £#%&! West Ham royally up the arse if he chose to, meaning possible relegation.

Presumably they must therefore have done a 'secret' deal behind the scenes meaning he doesn't shaft the Hammers, but he decides whether to sell, the fee and the destination, and they forego any cut.

Or something.

So who holds his registration? Surely only football clubs can hold that, so West Ham still do?

It's confuffling, to say the least.

Originally Posted by MrBishi

So who holds his registration? Surely only football clubs can hold that, so West Ham still do?

It's confuffling, to say the least.

MSI own the player. It's not common for that to happen in Europe, but they will decide when and where he moves until a club purchases his rights from them, which is what United will be hoping to do. They parked him at Corinthians, then they parked him at West Ham, but they are pretty loose ties to those clubs and MSI can move them on whenever they want.

Originally Posted by MrBishi

So who holds his registration? Surely only football clubs can hold that, so West Ham still do?

It's confuffling, to say the least.

Presumably yes. But the Hammers contract with MRSA won't be governed by football rules, simply the laws of a given country, presumably England & Wales. They would sue WHU in a normal court, meaning all the lies they'd told the Premiership enquiry would come out. So MI5 can basically do what the £#%&! they want, and West Ham have have to simply sit there in their gimp mask and take it. But it kept them up, so who cares?

I know MSI 'own', him but I was under the impression only football clubs could register players. He'll be registered with the FA & Premier League with West Ham, unless he's a free agent, which he isn't. So any move would at least need their permission, at least?

When did MI5 get involved?

Originally Posted by tim887

Presumably yes. But the Hammers contract with MRSA won't be governed by football rules, simply the laws of a given country, presumably England & Wales. They would sue WHU in a normal court, meaning all the lies they'd told the Premiership enquiry would come out. So MI5 can basically do what the £#%&! they want, and West Ham have have to simply sit there in their gimp mask and take it. But it kept them up, so who cares?

Cheers. I think.

Originally Posted by MrBishi

I know MSI 'own', him but I was under the impression only football clubs could register players. He'll be registered with the FA & Premier League with West Ham, unless he's a free agent, which he isn't. So any move would at least need their permission, at least?

I don't think so. I believe that part of the original agreement/understanding was that MSI would retain the right to move the player on at the end of the season if they chose to. Besides, I think the original point of the whole thing was for MSI to sweeten West Ham ahead of a takeover bid, which has since failed to materialise, so both parties are probably happy to go their seperate ways.

There is a difference between owning a player's economic rights and owning his registration. When MSI/JSI moved him to West Ham they retained full ownership of his economic rights. This distinction is quite common in South American football, but no so much in the UK or, to a lesser extent, Europe in general.

My understanding is that the problem was not that MSI/JSI retained ownership of Tevez's economic rights, but rather that there were clauses in the agreement between the two parties that allowed MSI/JSI to unilaterally terminate the agreement at any transfer window.

He's basically on loan at West Ham.