Tevez - A Question

[jimtastic]

So it looks like Tevez's agents/owners/whatever have come to an agreement with West Ham over the ownership of Tevez. And the next natural step, as reported by all press, is that Man Ure will sign him.

So what makes Tevez's potential transfer from his agents/owners/whatever to Man Ure any different to the original one which netted West Ham a £5.5m fine for giving money to a third party - a practice banned by the Premier League?

[Redhyde]

Actually found out the answer finally to this.

The issue was not that Tevez's economic rights were owned by a third party, but that West Ham entered into an agreement with that third party that allowed it to make decisions affecting the club. The contracts gave MSI the right to terminate Tevez and Mascherano's contracts under certain terms. This is an unambiguous violation of one of the rules which is roughtly "thou shalt not have third party influence" (which West Ham pleaded guilty to), and that was the only issue.

You can give money to third parties, but you can not let them have any say in decisions affecting the club. Manuel Fernandes at Everton was an example of this.

MSI cannot terminate Man Utds deal with Teves but they could have with West Ham which they shouldn't have been allowed to have that option.

[Geoff65]

The same deal that took masherano to liverpool is being copied my man utd to take tevez to man utd - quite a cute way of resolving this issue from man utd's point of view - you let liverpool do this then you have to let us do the same or the message to the FA is if you wont let us do it then are you about to take points of liverpool too and not let them compete in the champions leaguie?

[jimtastic]

Actually found out the answer finally to this.

The issue was not that Tevez's economic rights were owned by a third party, but that West Ham entered into an agreement with that third party that allowed it to make decisions affecting the club. The contracts gave MSI the right to terminate Tevez and Mascherano's contracts under certain terms. This is an unambiguous violation of one of the rules which is roughtly "thou shalt not have third party influence" (which West Ham pleaded guilty to), and that was the only issue.

You can give money to third parties, but you can not let them have any say in decisions affecting the club. Manuel Fernandes at Everton was an example of this.

MSI cannot terminate Man Utds deal with Teves but they could have with West Ham which they shouldn't have been allowed to have that option.

Fab - thanks for clearing that up for me. All makes sense now!