Mascherano and Tevez debacle

[red-rage]

what really concerns me is the issue over who actually owns mascherano as we might have loaned him from west ham but WHO gets the fee ?

As far as I can see tevez and mascherano are still in the same boat as far as ownership is concerned which means Liverpool aren’t necessarily in the clear, just because the premier deemed the loan legal if look at want they say about tevez now that they is concern that the transfer fee wont go to west ham ! But that shouldn’t be as west ham re-registered the player and the premier league were happy with everything and they shouldn’t have to worry now about any transfer. The whole thing stinks

I really don’t want to get to the end of the season and find out we're going to get ducked points because mascherano is owned still by a third party which sounds likely to me at the moment, I’d like the club and the premier league to come out clear this up once and for all.


quote :

Tevez's camp had hoped to have set up a deal worth a possible £30million and although there had been close to an agreement with the Red Devils, the Premier League have demanded that any transfer is handled by the Hammers and will block the move unless they are satisfied the transfer fee will go to West Ham.

The league accepted in April that West Ham had terminated all agreements with Tevez's agent Kia Joorabchian - and will keep a watchful eye on any transfer to ensure that the club keep their promise.

A Premier League spokesman said: "As far as we are concerned any deal to take Carlos Tevez away from West Ham has to be done directly with the club."

One possible avenue would be for West Ham to be paid a transfer fee and then agree a compensation figure with Joorabchian for breaching contracts with his company Media Sports Investments (MSI) when they terminated those agreements following their £5.5million fine in April for breaching Premier League rules.

It is understood though that the league would want a substantial chunk of the transfer fee to remain at West Ham rather than it all be handed over to MSI in compensation, otherwise they could be accused of merely covering up the third-party agreements that has caused so much controversy.

[Jonboy]

There is no problem with a third party owning a player, this is how the standard loan system works, the problem occurs when there is "third party influence". Basically when you loan a team a player you cannot have any say in what he does, team affairs etc. This is also why a loan player cannot play against his parent club.

The way I read about the original deal was that West Ham got the players for free from Corinthians on the understanding that they must sell if an offer over a certain value was received, this money would then go to MSI, who are the majority shareholders in Corinthians. This deal to me is like the sell on clauses that small clubs tend to have when they sell a player to another club, an example being Ipswich getting money from Darren Bents transfer to Spurs. The percentage in the Tevez and Mascherano deal though is 100% of the transfer fee. This means that we are loaning Mascherano from West Ham and not from MSI and Joorabchin.

This also means that if West Ham turn around and say Tevez is going nowhere then he stays unless someone meets the must sell figure in the original deal.

[Jonboy]

This is from the original hearing into the third party contracts.

Mr Mascherano

4 is now playing football for Liverpool. He is doing so

5 pursuant to a contract entirely different in form to

6 these contracts, and which has been approved by the

7 FAPL.

As such we have nothing to worry about.

The original contracts between West Ham and MSI are the problem, they gave MSI too much control over the players when they should have had none.

You can read the transcript here but be warned it is long

http://www.premierleague.com/public/downloads/publications/PL270407final.txt

[red-rage]

There is no problem with a third party owning a player, this is how the standard loan system works, the problem occurs when there is "third party influence". Basically when you loan a team a player you cannot have any say in what he does, team affairs etc. This is also why a loan player cannot play against his parent club.

The way I read about the original deal was that West Ham got the players for free from Corinthians on the understanding that they must sell if an offer over a certain value was received, this money would then go to MSI, who are the majority shareholders in Corinthians. This deal to me is like the sell on clauses that small clubs tend to have when they sell a player to another club, an example being Ipswich getting money from Darren Bents transfer to Spurs. The percentage in the Tevez and Mascherano deal though is 100% of the transfer fee. This means that we are loaning Mascherano from West Ham and not from MSI and Joorabchin.

This also means that if West Ham turn around and say Tevez is going nowhere then he stays unless someone meets the must sell figure in the original deal.


MSI are not a football club there lies the problem as in third party, west ham dont own the players registration.


I was under the impression corinthians transfered the registration over to msi inexchange for msi paying off the debts they owed

[Steven - Dublin]

It was Liverpool who alerted the Premier League to the conflict in their contracts in the first place. That is why it took so long for Mascherano's loan move to go through. It is reported that the mancs want to use the same contract format for their loan deal with Tevez.

The problem arises with who receives any fee from the sale/loan of Tevez. When West Ham were fined, they were told they must have ownership of Tevez's registration. They told the Premier League that any contracts were torn up. If he moves and they don't receive any transfer fee, it means that they were lying.

What happens then? Do they get relegated as they should have done in the first place? Do Sheffield Utd get promoted? What about the financial consequences? Warnock lost his job, Everton got that Blade player for £4m. The Hammers bought loads of players on the back of cheating. The Premier League have made a proper balls up of the whole thing. But it is a game run by crooks, so I wouldn't expect too many reprecussions.

[Nineteenx]

I'm sure Sheffield United will be very interested. There's no reason for West Ham to loan their best player to United IF they do actually own the player, they loaned us Mascherano because they wanted to.

I agree there probably is a buy out clause, but surely if there were no third party activity other than that West Ham would only let Tevez leave if the fee was met by United?

[ferg_g]

It was Liverpool who alerted the Premier League to the conflict in their contracts in the first place. That is why it took so long for Mascherano's loan move to go through. .


I thought it took so long to go through was more down to the fact he'd played for 2 clubs already in the same season.

Anyway - we're in the clear as our transfer was well looked into plus the hammers didn't want to keep Maschereno.

06/07/2007 18:22

The following is an official statement from West Ham United Chairman Eggert Magnusson...

"Carlos Tevez is a registered West Ham United player, contracted to the Club until June 2010.

"There is no agreement with West Ham United for Carlos Tevez to leave the Club and we expect him to return in time for next season's preparations.

"No decision on his future can be reached without the agreement of West Ham United

[Steven - Dublin]

I thought it took so long to go through was more down to the fact he'd played for 2 clubs already in the same season.

06/07/2007 18:22

The following is an official statement from West Ham United Chairman Eggert Magnusson...

"Carlos Tevez is a registered West Ham United player, contracted to the Club until June 2010.

"There is no agreement with West Ham United for Carlos Tevez to leave the Club and we expect him to return in time for next season's preparations.

"No decision on his future can be reached without the agreement of West Ham United

That too. After FIFA said that he could be loaned to us, it still took a couple of weeks for the Premier League to rubber stamp it. Normally it goes straight through.

The West Ham statement means jack shit if he's lying. They knew they were breaking the rules and said nothing. It was only when we looked to take Mascherano on loan were the Premier League notified. Then they had to say they held Tevez's registration, otherwise they would have a point deduction and wouldn't be able to play their best player. With £50m riding on staying in the Premier League or getting relegated, of course they are going to say what is needed.

[Hunt 23]

I.

06/07/2007 18:22

The following is an official statement from West Ham United Chairman Eggert Magnusson...

"Carlos Tevez is a registered West Ham United player, contracted to the Club until June 2010.

"There is no agreement with West Ham United for Carlos Tevez to leave the Club and we expect him to return in time for next season's preparations.

"No decision on his future can be reached without the agreement of West Ham United


They have to say that.

What I didn't understand is how they "tore up" the agreement with the third party. If you buy a car with a loan you can't just "tear up" the agreement and say to the loan company that you are not paying any more money but are keeping the car. How are we to believe that West Ham told the third party that they were tearing up the deal but keeping their player worth in excess of £20 million and that if they sold him then they wopuld keep the money? It didn't and still doesn't make sense. Now it appears that the third party is trying to sell Tevez. If he goes to Manure then West Ham are in BIG trouble.

[Jonboy]

They have to say that.

What I didn't understand is how they "tore up" the agreement with the third party. If you buy a car with a loan you can't just "tear up" the agreement and say to the loan company that you are not paying any more money but are keeping the car. How are we to believe that West Ham told the third party that they were tearing up the deal but keeping their player worth in excess of £20 million and that if they sold him then they wopuld keep the money? It didn't and still doesn't make sense. Now it appears that the third party is trying to sell Tevez. If he goes to Manure then West Ham are in BIG trouble.

In the initial judgement most of the terms of the agreement between MSI and West Ham were deemed to be legally unenforceable which is why the agreement was torn up, it doesn't mean that another agreement within the rules was not written. As West Ham were basically given both players on the understanding that if an offer of above a certain value was received then they must be sold then they are not entitled to any money. It is a sell on clause, the only difference being that all the transfer fee goes to Corinthians who are owned by MSI.

[Steven - Dublin]

It has never been reported that another agreement was drawn up. I think having an agreement at all was the conflict.

Which also make you wonder why Kia Joorabchian was never interviewed by the Premier league panel. This man is central to the whole problem yet the authorities never thought it would be relevant to even speak to him and accepted West Ham's as good enough

[tarndog]

According to Harry Harris it todays Express the company MSI have contracts relating to the player that have not been disclosed to the Premier League.
These contracts, believed to be between the player and MSI, and have never been released to the Hammers board, are said to prove that Tevez in 'owned' by MSI.
A source within MSI said "We own Tevez and we have negotiated his transfer to Manu, not West Ham".
Tevez when interviewed at Argentinian trainng base said "I don't know anything".
The whole thing stinks.

[red-rage]

from what i have read in todays papers its not illegal for a player to be owned by company but west ham should have registered both players as season long loans.But they lied saying they had bought the players outright. Then west ham tore up tevez's is contract and put a new one saying he was owed by them and not msi, which is why wigan chairman kick up stink rightly by saying that west ham still dont own tevez and the player's registration was still breaking the rules.

tevez agents knows he has the right to sell or re loan the player anywhere he likes as msi's contract with westham finished 01/07 whether tevez sign a four deal or not as that contract isnt worth the ink it was written with. Now if this comes to light that westham have lied again what will the preimership do ? this why they have come out and said basically do makes us investigate this further just make sure utd pay westham the money upfront whatever happens to the money afterwards we dont.

You have to ask yourselve why the premiership seemed happy for this to go through in the first place, answer because its been going on for years and they dont want it raked up.

[Steven - Dublin]

Now if this comes to light that westham have lied again what will the preimership do ?

Nothing because the premier league are up to their necks in it. Look at what happened:


West Ham fined instead of deducting points. Reason for this finding was because it was late in the season. It shouldn't have made any difference when in the season it was.


West Ham told to make sure that the contracts were in order. The Premier league took West Ham's assurances that they were, without even bothering to check with the real owner of Tevez's registration.


Appeal panel agreed that West Ham should have been deducted points but it did not have the power to overturn the original decision.

So, West Ham lied through their teeth and the Premier League let them do it. Who is worse?

[Psychoticmonkey]

So what's stopping us (or any team, in fact) illegally signing good a player on the cheap, then just paying the £5m fine? A points deduction wouldn't be in keeping with the precedent that's now ridiculously been set.

[Steven - Dublin]

After all the shit that this case has caused, I can’t see the Premier League being as lenient in the future (unless it’s the mancs or Chelsea of course ;) ).

[Big Ed]

So Mascherano can get in the box and score goals?

Duly noted.

[Psychoticmonkey]

After all the shit that this case has caused, I can’t see the Premier League being as lenient in the future (unless it’s the mancs or Chelsea of course ;) ).

But how can they justify giving a different punishment if the same thing happens again?

[Big Ed]

You mean how could they pass a judgement that goes beyond logic understanding or fairness?

Hmmmmmm.

[Steven - Dublin]

But how can they justify giving a different punishment if the same thing happens again?

Do they have to justify their decisions?

[red-rage]

The purported transfer of Carlos Tevez to Manchester United has taken a fresh twist, with the news that an arrest order has been issued for businessman Kia Joorabchian, the representative responsible for the player's affairs.

A federal judge in Brazil has charged Joorabchian, amongst others, with money-laundering and being part of a criminal gang, for the role he played in the relationship between Media Sports Investment (MSI), the company he fronts, and Corinthians, the Brazilian club he first took Tevez to, before bringing him to England.

London-based MSI has been under investigation ever since it took over Corinthians back in 2004, with Brazilian intelligence known to have run thorough checks on the company.

"The (MSI) transactions are carried out with the use of numerous offshore accounts which have the single and well-known intention of distancing the investor and the illicit origin of the resources from their final destination, in this case the purchase and sale of (football) players," the federal attorneys Silvio Luis Martins de Oliveira and Rodrigo de Grandis are quoted as saying on Brazilian legal website consultor Juridico.

The detention of Corinthians president Alberto Dualib has also been ordered, along with that of Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky, whose money is thought to have bankrolled MSI. Both face similar charges.

News of Joorabchian's impending arrest has overshadowed the news, revealed exclusively to Sky Sports News on Thursday, that Tevez would wrap up his move to Manchester United in the next few days.

Suspicions of corruption were raised by the failure of money involved in the purchasing of players to be passed through the country, in a chain of events which has manifest accusations of money laundering. Both MSI and Corinthians have reportedly been unable to clarify the origins of the money, which proceeded to lead to the investigation, that has ultimately led to Joorabchian's impending arrest and cast further doubts over Tevez's move to United.

Joorabchian has been at the centre of the furore caused by Tevez's switch to West Ham, which concluded at the campaign's end with the Premier League club being fined £5.5million, having been found guilty of third-party ownership.

Sheffield United, who feel they should be reinstated to the top flight, at West Ham's expense, have taken the matter to the High Court, but it would appear Joorabchian now has more pressing affairs of his own.

[Chop]

Funny writing style you've got there Red-Rage, very erm, journalistic. :rolleyes: