The Treves Saga

[gennisis]

I ve been following the events recently regarding Tevez and I am now even more confused than the Premier League officals seem to be.

As I understand it.....

In March the EPL were satisfied that West Ham,(from their asurences) had ceased any contractual ties with Tevez s "Owner" and from this the player was correctly owned and under contract to West Ham.

The Argentinean "owner" was no longer the 'Owner",but presumably could still act as his agent,if he was approved by the FA. The FA or EPL officials accepted this.

So..now...why is Man Un negotiating with Tevez and acting as though West Ham have nothing to do with the possible transfer. West Ham say they have had no contact or offer from Man U. The EPL say that West ham and only West Ham can agree with any transfer and must recieve the bulk of any transfer fee.(presumably allowing the Ex owner to recieve something as his cut for being the agent).

If West Ham are telling porkies about tearing up the previous agreement...and so what is happening with Man U have some legitimacy .. then for sure it will bring out further actions against them and possibly demotion from the Premiership.

.As I said ,I cant get my head round all of this...can anyone explain??

And if some "clever clogs" complains about this having nothing to do with Thailand...well we wouldnt be very excited about Thai football would we.!!

Edited July 20, 2007 by gennisis

[mr_hippo]

Who is Treves? Do you mean Tevez?

[gennisis]

Sorry....I did say that I was confused.

[binnsy]

If Tevez is a bit dodgy dealing how did Liverpool get away with the other Argie Maraschino?

As both came to WHU at same time both by that iranian chap

DODGY VERY DODGY

[ThaiPauly]

The Football Forum does not have to be Thai related.

There would not be many threads if it was

[Prakanong]

I heard an explaination the other day regarding two different "rights"

WHU have his players registration but the other guy owns the "Economic" rights.

Now what this means in practice I do not know.

I suspect something not exactly above board might have been done with WHU so they did not get done but the other guy kept certain rights that would make it that something as dodgy.

Now Man U want him th economics rights guy want his money and along with Teves is threatening to letit all out if he does not get them

Anybody else as I may be as confused as anyone else?

Maybe Sheff U had more of a case than we knew?

[tw25rw]

The trouble is that Kia Joorabchian is an inveterate liar and now Man Utd are falling for it. Tevez probably believes that West Ham are holding him up whereas really, they are doing what the Prem are making them do to keep out of trouble.

Liverpool negotiated a different contract with Joorabchian. The deal that got us into trouble was part of the terms of the takeover when he was trying to buy us out, but aren't relevant to Liverpool.

The sooner players 'owned' by Joorabchian's ilk are prevented from being registered in England (and elsewhere), and he is banned from acting as an agent, the better for football.

Eggert Magnusson is a smart guy and an experienced football administrator, so I trust his judgement if he decides to hardball Man Utd and Joorabchian over this.

[keddy]

I heard an explaination the other day regarding two different "rights"

WHU have his players registration but the other guy owns the "Economic" rights.

Now what this means in practice I do not know.

I suspect something not exactly above board might have been done with WHU so they did not get done but the other guy kept certain rights that would make it that something as dodgy.

Now Man U want him th economics rights guy want his money and along with Teves is threatening to letit all out if he does not get them

Anybody else as I may be as confused as anyone else?

Maybe Sheff U had more of a case than we knew?

The only case Sheffield Utd have, is a nut case which is their chairman McCabe. They did not get enough points over 38 games. This saga has been covered in the West Ham Utd and Sheffield Utd threads but it's difficult to comment without any outsider seeing the two different contracts both parties hold but it seems WHUFC have the advantage as Carlos Tevez is registered with the club untill 2010. The original contract ackowledging Kia Jooriban's economic rights over the player was torn up. What was put in place nobody outside knows yet, but it looks like it's going to drag on for awhile. The irony is Sheffield U and Man U have also contravened rule 18 with the Kabba and Howard cases. Man U have also been 'tapping' up Tevez without going through the club so I'd be happy to see Man Utd relegated and Sheffield Utd reinstated as they haven't done as much wrong as those cursed red devils .

[EastSaxCol]

It'll be sorted..........eventually

[tw25rw]

I suspect something not exactly above board might have been done with WHU so they did not get done but the other guy kept certain rights that would make it that something as dodgy.

There was an agreement that KJ could cancel their registration for a sum of money during the transfer window if he saw fit. This was apparently in case the takeover fell through, as it did. This is what made us fall foul of the 3rd party influence rule. Relatively trivial compared to selling a player on condition that he can't play against his old team.

Now Man U want him th economics rights guy want his money and along with Teves is threatening to letit all out if he does not get them

Anybody else as I may be as confused as anyone else?

Maybe Sheff U had more of a case than we knew?

I doubt he has anything new. Eggert would have provide all the relevant info to the Premier League. I'm sure all the dealings of the current regime have been entirely transparent.

Something to note is that when the players signed for us, KJ said that the deal was permanent, not a loan, and they were registered for 4 years. Last week, he said the deal was a 1 year loan which had expired. He's lying and certain people, ie Man Utd, are falling for it.

[EastSaxCol]

from http://www.westhamfans.org/

Neville Nixon writes:

Much as we are loathe to add another article about the relentless Carlos Tevez saga, it would be remiss to not comment on the latest developments.

With FIFA becoming involved the saga is set to run and run but it is an inevitable and unenviable task that Eggert Magnusson is having to perform for his club as Carlito's move to Manchester United reaches it's final stages.

Between a rock and a hard place, the Hammers Chairman has got to see things through to the bitter end, on the one hand there is a player who has made his mind up to leave the club, and on the other a situation that dictates absolute caution and clarity of thought.

West Ham HAVE to pursue every possible course in order to be the recipient of any transfer fees generated by the Argentine's move to Old Trafford, any lapse would be seen as admition that Hammers didn't terminate their original deal with Tevez and MSI.

By willingly accepting the involvement of FIFA, West Ham have basically given up all prospect of a bumper pay off, but more importantly the club will be able to officially distance themselves from any future recriminations regarding the Premier League's decision to let him play on for the remainder of the season after Hammers had been fined but not docked points under rule 18.

If FIFA rule that the player is now a free agent because his original contract had been terminated by West Ham, then they will sanction the transfer with Hammers receiving little or no money, on the other hand they may feel that the deal must be concluded between West Ham and Manchester United without the direct involvement of Kia Joorabchian and MSI.. Carlitos and Mascher arrived in unlikely circumstances, a little like finding your bank account has suddenly been credited with a load of cash that you know isn't yours, it was always going to end in tears!.

It is most definitely time to move on, of course the protracted nature of the process will make things drag on, but this is not a situation that can be won, unfortunately the best Eggert can really do is bark loud and long but then retreat with his tail between his legs. All along he has expressed his unease about the dodgy deal that saw the arrival of the two Argentine superstars which was brokered by that nice man Pini Zahavi and slipped through the back door by Terry Brown and Kia 'playerinchains'.

[keddy]

I suspect something not exactly above board might have been done with WHU so they did not get done but the other guy kept certain rights that would make it that something as dodgy.

There was an agreement that KJ could cancel their registration for a sum of money during the transfer window if he saw fit. This was apparently in case the takeover fell through, as it did. This is what made us fall foul of the 3rd party influence rule. Relatively trivial compared to selling a player on condition that he can't play against his old team.

Now Man U want him th economics rights guy want his money and along with Teves is threatening to letit all out if he does not get them

Anybody else as I may be as confused as anyone else?

Maybe Sheff U had more of a case than we knew?

I doubt he has anything new. Eggert would have provide all the relevant info to the Premier League. I'm sure all the dealings of the current regime have been entirely transparent.

Something to note is that when the players signed for us, KJ said that the deal was permanent, not a loan, and they were registered for 4 years. Last week, he said the deal was a 1 year loan which had expired. He's lying and certain people, ie Man Utd, are falling for it.

What is curious is why are Man U dealing directly with Joorabin and not with West Ham U. Even if they did believe he held the economic rights there would still have to be an official approach, which is something they never did, apparently. The other thing is Alex F turned down the offer of taking them on, before they came to us, because 'the deal wasn't right' What has changed with the terms? They are probably similar and even more costly than a year ago. They also seem to want to take the player on loan or do they have any option to buy? If Tevez does stay will he be up for the cause or will he be sitting on the bench keeping Lee Bowyer company.

[tw25rw]

The other thing is Alex F turned down the offer of taking them on, before they came to us, because 'the deal wasn't right' What has changed with the terms? They are probably similar and even more costly than a year ago. They also seem to want to take the player on loan or do they have any option to buy? If Tevez does stay will he be up for the cause or will he be sitting on the bench keeping Lee Bowyer company.

He's seen him in the flesh and knows how good he is.. Probably never heard of him before..

[Sunderland]

Who's Tevez? Sounds like the name of a Latin sanitary towel

[EastSaxCol]

The other thing is Alex F turned down the offer of taking them on, before they came to us, because 'the deal wasn't right' What has changed with the terms? They are probably similar and even more costly than a year ago. They also seem to want to take the player on loan or do they have any option to buy? If Tevez does stay will he be up for the cause or will he be sitting on the bench keeping Lee Bowyer company.

He's seen him in the flesh and knows how good he is.. Probably never heard of him before..

Thay's what it wa all about wasn't it. West Ham were just used as a shop window to adverise their undoubted quality. On that score it worked very well for Tevez.

Old red nose will eventually get his man and we're staying up.

[Jimjim]

All I've got to say is I don't want to see Tevez go to Man. U. Arsenal would be ok, but Man. U are acting like idiots in this one.

[EastSaxCol]

All I've got to say is I don't want to see Tevez go to Man. U. Arsenal would be ok, but Man. U are acting like idiots in this one.

Not only like idiots but illegally as well. Not that anyone is going to do anything about the tapping-up I don't suppose.

[mrbojangles]

Hopefully this mess will be sorted out today. What an absolute joke.

[gennisis]

I heard an explaination the other day regarding two different "rights"

WHU have his players registration but the other guy owns the "Economic" rights.

Now what this means in practice I do not know.

I suspect something not exactly above board might have been done with WHU so they did not get done but the other guy kept certain rights that would make it that something as dodgy.

Now Man U want him th economics rights guy want his money and along with Teves is threatening to letit all out if he does not get them

Anybody else as I may be as confused as anyone else?

Maybe Sheff U had more of a case than we knew?

The only case Sheffield Utd have, is a nut case which is their chairman McCabe. They did not get enough points over 38 games. This saga has been covered in the West Ham Utd and Sheffield Utd threads but it's difficult to comment without any outsider seeing the two different contracts both parties hold but it seems WHUFC have the advantage as Carlos Tevez is registered with the club untill 2010. The original contract ackowledging Kia Jooriban's economic rights over the player was torn up. What was put in place nobody outside knows yet, but it looks like it's going to drag on for awhile. The irony is Sheffield U and Man U have also contravened rule 18 with the Kabba and Howard cases. Man U have also been 'tapping' up Tevez without going through the club so I'd be happy to see Man Utd relegated and Sheffield Utd reinstated as they haven't done as much wrong as those cursed red devils .

A nice thought...Man U relegated...

[tw25rw]

The way Liverpool are behaving, I think they may step in and gazump Man Utd..

[mrbojangles]

Looks like it will go on longer!!

From the BBC:-

Fifa will not rule on Tevez saga

Tevez is keen to move to Old Trafford

Fifa has recommended that the Carlos Tevez dispute should go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

The Argentine striker wants to join Manchester United, but West Ham and businessman Kia Joorabchian both claim to own the player.

The Football Association and the Premier League asked Fifa to rule on the matter.

But a Fifa statement read: "Fifa has recommended that West Ham and Carlos Tevez seek arbitration at CAS."

It continued: "Under the present circumstances this was deemed to be the best approach and in the interest of all parties.

"What is more, we also believe this to be the fastest way to solve this impasse."

CAS is yet to comment on whether it will hear the case, but BBC Sport understands Joorabchian is considering taking the matter to the High Court in order to push through a deal before the transfer window closes on 31 August.

United are expected to pay up to £30m for Tevez, but the transfer has reached an impasse over who should receive the fee.

Tevez is registered as a West Ham player, but Joorabchian claims he still owns the striker's economic rights and is therefore entitled to the transfer fee.

However, West Ham ripped up an agreement they had with Joorabchian - which broke Premier League rules - and they now claim any deal with United can only go ahead with their say-so.

The Premier League, which is also insisting that any fee must go to West Ham, met with Fifa and the Football Association on Monday to discuss the issue.

Fifa spokesman Andreas Herren said: "Under the circumstances it was felt it would be in the best interest of all parties to take this course.

"It looks like being the fastest way of resolving this matter.

"It is not a refusal by Fifa to get involved, quite the contrary. It is a recommendation by Fifa to opt for this way."

The Premier League welcomed Fifa's decision.

A spokesman said: "The Premier League and FA are grateful to Fifa for considering this issue.

"We are supportive of the recommendation that if all parties are in agreement the matter should be referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport."

[EastSaxCol]

Looks like it will go on longer!![/qoute]

It's difficult to see this reaching any sort of conclusuion before the transfer window closes to be honest.

So it looks like we may be stuck with Tevez for a while?

Which would be a definate minus - having someone who wants to play elsewhere in the squad.

But on the plus side. In Tevez's case I'm pretty sure that he'll play his heart out whoever he's with.

[KhaoNiaw]

The main problem is that the FA did not take any steps to investigate how West Ham had resolved the joint ownership issue. West Ham said that they'd torn up the agreement and the FA said "OK, fine."

But the reason it needs to go to arbitration is because how can one side unilaterally end the agreement? If the other side had said they'd dissolved the agreement and he belonged solely to them, would West Ham have agreed? How it will turn out is far from clear cut.

[tw25rw]

The main problem is that the FA did not take any steps to investigate how West Ham had resolved the joint ownership issue. West Ham said that they'd torn up the agreement and the FA said "OK, fine."

But the reason it needs to go to arbitration is because how can one side unilaterally end the agreement? If the other side had said they'd dissolved the agreement and he belonged solely to them, would West Ham have agreed? How it will turn out is far from clear cut.

It was the Premier League, not the FA..

I think that the fact that the League consider the agreement invalid, and West Ham agreeing not to honour it was enough. The agreement being against League rules meant that it was invalid from the start. Signing that agreement cos us £2.5m. Hiding it cost £3. Honouring it would have been a lot more, hence we are holding on to Tevez's registration as originally agreed.

[sumrit]

It was the Premier League, not the FA..

I think that the fact that the League consider the agreement invalid, and West Ham agreeing not to honour it was enough. The agreement being against League rules meant that it was invalid from the start. Signing that agreement cos us £2.5m. Hiding it cost £3. Honouring it would have been a lot more, hence we are holding on to Tevez's registration as originally agreed.

Suely if West Ham tore up the original agreement they no longer have a four year contract with Tevez that they are claiming because thats what they tore up. You can't agree to buy something from a shop, unilaterally tear up the agreement, not pay for it in full and then still keep the item. And if West Ham don't have a valid contract with Tevez they can't legaly hold on to his registration, that amounts to restraint of trade and is illegal. Remember Bosman, thats what happened to him and when he went to court he won and football was the looser.

[tw25rw]

Suely if West Ham tore up the original agreement they no longer have a four year contract with Tevez that they are claiming because thats what they tore up. You can't agree to buy something from a shop, unilaterally tear up the agreement, not pay for it in full and then still keep the item. And if West Ham don't have a valid contract with Tevez they can't legaly hold on to his registration, that amounts to restraint of trade and is illegal. Remember Bosman, thats what happened to him and when he went to court he won and football was the looser.

The contract with the player was for 4 years. The agreement with Joorabchian was seperate and related to his takeover of the club.

[toasted]

30m squid is way over the top for this player in my opinion. He hit a purple patch at West Ham for about 10 (?) games, but did it take him time to adjust to the English game, or was it a temporary period of exceptional form? He's been touted as the next Maradonna, but who hasn't?

Whatever, the way his transfers have been conducted is a disgrace, and any team/owner who gets involved is doing the game a terrible disservice. The FA really need to get their act together on this and a range of other matters that are turning a growing number of fans away from the game.

[EastSaxCol]

30m squid is way over the top for this player in my opinion. He hit a purple patch at West Ham for about 10 (?) games, but did it take him time to adjust to the English game, or was it a temporary period of exceptional form?

The first part is correct. It did take him time to adapt. But with all the silly money flying around , the 30ml seems like the going price for someone of Tevez's undoubted class.

Although anyone who only saw the Copa Final might question that. But to be fair, they'd also have questioned if Argentina were the best team in the world at the moment.

He's been touted as the next Maradonna, but who hasn't?

Christian Dailly

Whatever, the way his transfers have been conducted is a disgrace, and any team/owner who gets involved is doing the game a terrible disservice. The FA really need to get their act together on this and a range of other matters that are turning a growing number of fans away from the game.

I think you'e right. This has been happening since the start of what I call the embourgoisement of the game, when it became an acceptable middle-class sport as opposed to what t was once considered by them (Nick Hornby's - Fever Pitch made it so) The bread and butter, backbone support was also priced out of going to games.

I could go on about the plastic supportrs of some teams, but I'll desist.

Now it's all spiralled to a different level again , one step beyond the parasitical agents to this third-party ownership crap.They ought to stamp on this one. But whether they will...? As someone once said, that there was "nothing sacred in capitalism." And let's face it football has now become nothing more than the plaything of those with no interest in the game, thinking it more a game of Monopoly on the global capitalism stage.*

Semi rant over

* Eggy apart of course

[sumrit]

Suely if West Ham tore up the original agreement they no longer have a four year contract with Tevez that they are claiming because thats what they tore up. You can't agree to buy something from a shop, unilaterally tear up the agreement, not pay for it in full and then still keep the item. And if West Ham don't have a valid contract with Tevez they can't legaly hold on to his registration, that amounts to restraint of trade and is illegal. Remember Bosman, thats what happened to him and when he went to court he won and football was the looser.

The contract with the player was for 4 years. The agreement with Joorabchian was seperate and related to his takeover of the club.

The Premier League didn't think they were separate, they fined West Ham £5.5m because they were connected. West Ham didn't think they were separate, firstly they accepted the fine then they 'tore up the agreement' to try and separate the 4 year contract from the third party connection.

Regardless of the attempted takeover of the club the Premier League ruled that the Tevez contract and Joorabchian,s 'ownership' of Tevez were connected so if West Ham tore up their contract with Joorabchian they must have also made their contract with Tevez null and void.

[KhaoNiaw]

From the Guardian's football site, it seems that the case might not go to the courts, with West Ham after compensation of about 100,000 quid to release his registration.

Someone's going to make a lot of money from the deal and it won't be West Ham.