Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
well this situation (agents owning a player, entirely of just a percentage) is quite weird for us europeans, but is quite normal in south america. I heard an agent on skytv a couple of days ago, who was explaining how those people are important for football in south america. he said that without them south american football would collapse coz brazilian and argentinian football clubs wouldn't have enough money to keep their players.
this agent said that usually when theese players come in europe, european clubs buy "the whole player" (paying the the club and the agent).
that's not what happened this time coz tevez was getting "old" and still no european club was making concrete offers for him. So Kia decided to put himself tevez in the european market, "parking" him at west ham.
You are totally right mate it's very common in south america.
Some agent have one leg some companies have the other and pheraps one arm and the club gets f**cked all the time! (sad but true)
Have you heard of Nilmar-Lyon-Agent-Corinthians-MSI-Lawyer-Fifa-CBF :sad:
If WHU would just say 'yes' and agree to let Tevez come to us, then everything would be resolved. Isn't this basically just what happened with Mascherano, just without the 'yes'?
West Ham agree with MSI for an 'official' £2m release fee.
Tevez to Man Utd imminent.
FFS, what a mess!
a 2m release fee to MSI?
West Ham should have been relegated.
Why?
Because West Ham broke the rules regarding ownership of players and lied about it to the premier league.
Incorrect.
We broke the rules regarding 3rd party influence.
There is nothing against having a 3rd party player playing for you (see Fernandes).
The problem arose with the clause that said MSI could move Tevez on for a set fee.
This was illegal, this is what the old owners covered up, this is what we were fined a world record sports fine for.
Carlos Tevez then went and scored the crucial goal that kept West Ham in the premier league.
Even if he never scored against Man Utd, we still would have stayed up.
Nothing to do with Sheff Utd being completely shit and losing at home to Wigan on the last day, no?
It becomes a petty argument on semantics which only serves to suit Sheff Utd's argument and detract from their own shortcomings
The whole Tevez affair was a farce in which the premier league made themselves complicit by stating that they had received proof from West Ham that the player belonged to West Ham.
They had recieved proof and published a letter stating so.
Again, the Premier League's incompetence is not our problem.
If Tevez was owned by West Ham then why is it that Tevez could be moved onto Man Utd against the wishes of West Ham with West Ham receiving a paltry 2 million in compensation?
Because we owned the player's registration and MSI owned the economical rights.
Something that is not illegal.
You could say the £2m was a payoff and settlement for the problems that MSI caused us with the negotiation of the original contract.
The fact is the premier league stated that West Ham proved that they owned Tevez because they were petrified of potential court action from Sheffield Utd for their lack of action over the affair.
Not our problem
West Ham could not and did not prove that Tevez was their player; they could not do so because he patently was not their player, but MSI’s player.
Of course he was MSI's player.
We had him on loan deal which was valid except for the 3rd party influence.
It was stated that West Ham had tore up the contract with MSI and therefore MSI did not own the player.
No it wasn't.
It was stated that we renogotiated a new contract, removing the original offending clause which was the 3rd party influence over our club's decisions.
Interesting, I never realized that is how contract law worked. Someone ownes something that you borrow and to own it all you have to do is rip up the contract LMAO.
So ALL contracts can simply be ripped up and then it is as though they do not exist.
Presumably I can go and rent a flat and then simply rip up the signed contract and claim I now own the flat? Ludicrous!!!
All irrelevant
West Ham acted tough until MSI threatened court action and then acted like a paper tiger because MSI would have shafted West Ham all over the place at the high court with little things like indisputable facts as to who owned Tevez and minor things like….the other contract….you know the one that MSI kept- given that contracts are given to both parties LMAO.
So is this where you get literal with the 'ripping up the contract'?
You think Magnusson literally ripped the contract up and threw it in the bin and said: 'Tevez is our player, so there'?
It's just a turn of phrase mate.
The deal was renegotiated and accepted by the Premier League which makes our actions completely lawful and valid.
The problem then arose that with the deal of Tevez going to Man Utd, the Premier league wanted to ensure that it was West Ham that was influencing the deal, so this is why we had to appear to have the sole ability to influence the player's decision.
Of course, MSI own the players economic rights and we own the player's registration.... nothing wrong there, but the Premier Leagues original incompetence with dealing with Sheff Utd meant they had to watch their own backs and tiptoe around the situation.
Something that unfortunately we had to abide by.
Everything was done above board and to the letter.
We owned the players registration, MSI owned his economic rights. We Negotiated a deal between us to release Tevez' registration to effectively release him as a free agent. It was done, he left.
The real facts then.
A) Tevez was loaned to West Ham.
Correct
B) MSI were the owners of Tevez not West Ham.
Correct
C) The form of agreement broke the premiership rules and made Tevez ineligible to play for them.
Tevez or Mascherano were never ineligible to play for West Ham.
The player's registration has always been valid, even if an economic clause in the contract between club and owner was invalid.
Premier League allow foreign transfers to occur all the time that breach contractual rules and the Premier League then work with all parties to ratify the contract to make it legal, even if the player has been playing for a set time.
D) He played for them while ineligible
Incorrect
E) West Ham lied to the premier league about the nature of the deal
True.
The one thing that I cannot defend and the one thing I am ashamed of.
Also the thing which was included in our record fine.
F) The premier League took inappropriately lean action against West Ham because they did not foresee the circumstances that could occur due to Tevez playing given West Hams league position.
It stands to reason that the punishment fits the crime.
We were fined a record fine and were not deducted points because of the current situation.
You would say the punishment should be the smae no mater when it happened, but such 'leniency' is commonplace in all forms of judicial law.
G) The premier League stated they had proof of West Ham’s ownership of Tevez, which made the premier league complicit in- as no such legitimate documentation existed.
Rumour.
Premier League were notified and satisfied by West Ham that all contracts were made legal and on review, they were.
H) Tevez score the goals that kept West Ham up and in particular scored the final goal that altered the course of relegation.
Horseshit.
Mark Noble, Robert Green, Bobby Zamora and James Collins were instrumental in keeping West Ham up.
Robert Green produced one of the best Goalkeeping displays from a West Ham goalkeeper ever at the Emirates to secure 3 points along with Zamora's goal.
Can you not see how pathetic the argument is about Tevez' influence on the season's proceedings is considering we as a team and with a perfectly legitimate Tevez in our team were far superior than any team in the country for the final 10 games and that sheff Utd threw away over a 10 point lead because they were so poor.
It is a wishy washy argument designed to suit poor hard done by Sheff Utd.
I) West Ham had no choice in Tevez moving to Man Utd despite paper Tiger gestures
Of course it's paper gestures, but nonetheless the paper was legal.
The only reason it was made into a farce was the Premier League and original independent commission's failure to quash the case and end any leg that Sheff Utd had to stand on.
J) MSI new this which is why they were taking West Ham to court
Of course they were. It's is £30m worth of property to them.
K) MSI agreed a paltry figure out of court so that the deal with Man Utd could be pushed through and agreed to give 2 million of a 30 million pounds worth of economic rights to West Ham for the bungled outstanding loan period of the player.
We had no economic rights to the player, what we had was the legal ownership of Tevez playing contract, which was agreed to by MSI with the renegotiation of the old contracts.
Something that MSI were responsible in and rightly compensating us for our troubles.
West Ham are in the premier league because of Tevez’s contribution to the team, conversely Sheffiled Utd are in the Champuionship- Tevez was ineligible to play for West ham.
West Ham are in the Premier league because we were better than Sheff Utd.
Does that cover it?
No.
It just sounds like the usual nonsense that I see spun in the press.
P.S
I like West Ham asa club a lot, I don't like Sheffield Utd. As an Everton fan I/we benefited from Sheffield Utd going down as this opened up the clause in Jagielkas contract that allowed us to get him..
Nowt to do we Me liking West Ham, Nowt to do with us benefiting, Nowt to do with a team I don't like going down.
I just think the situation was a disgrace to the EPL, a disgrace to football and evything that sport and fair play is about. It brought shame to the name of sport and was fundamentally wrong.
That is my honest opinion.
Because West Ham broke the rules regarding ownership of players and lied about it to the premier league.
Incorrect.
We broke the rules regarding 3rd party influence.
There is nothing against having a 3rd party player playing for you (see Fernandes).
The problem arose with the clause that said MSI could move Tevez on for a set fee.
This was illegal, this is what the old owners covered up, this is what we were fined a world record sports fine for.
H) Tevez score the goals that kept West Ham up and in particular scored the final goal that altered the course of relegation.
Horseshit.
Mark Noble, Robert Green, Bobby Zamora and James Collins were instrumental in keeping West Ham up.
Robert Green produced one of the best Goalkeeping displays from a West Ham goalkeeper ever at the Emirates to secure 3 points along with Zamora's goal.
Can you not see how pathetic the argument is about Tevez' influence on the season's proceedings is considering we as a team and with a perfectly legitimate Tevez in our team were far superior than any team in the country for the final 10 games and that sheff Utd threw away over a 10 point lead because they were so poor.
It is a wishy washy argument designed to suit poor hard done by Sheff Utd.
Tevez was ineligible to play for West Ham Utd because the contract was not legitimate because of the technicality that it broke.
You cannot say that Tevez was eligible to play for West Ham from the time of the original contract because the contract was not legal because of an illegal provision in it.
Tevez should never have been at West Ham for the re-negotiated and now supposed legal contract because his initial registration was ileagal based on the entirety of the premier leagues rules.
If the original contract is illegal- which it was that means it had vitiating circumstances and was not worth the paper it was written on. That means the second contract that the premier league has accepted is outside the transfer window and not legitimate doesn’t it?
I will be honest I am not sure of this point and am not pushing it too hard. This point alone may mean that Tevez’s second contract was also illegal…..
There should have been a two-leg play-off match, West Ham (without Tevez) versus Sheffield United. Winner is given a Premiership place, all proceeds given to charity.
Sorry for not quoting exactly the singular parts, but I will make the point as a whole.