egafd.com

Tell me something...........

If you owned 2 players, worth a joint 40-50 million pounds, would you just give them to West Ham........free?

Tell you what I think? I think 2 Argentinian youngsters wanted to play in the Premiership, and the big clubs were dubious about paying big fees for players that may not adapt to this league (remember Veron/Forlan?) I think Joorbachian found a club who'd take them and 'pretend' they'd captured these players, in the hope of them helping the team, and prooving themselves in the Premiership. Upon the big transfers to said big clubs, Joorbachian gets a big payday and gives a big fat commission to the club that took the chance in giving the youngsters game time.

He found good ole West Ham, who saw the two world stars as a way of promoting their own club as a club on the up, and saw players that may help them get into Europe, and then a payout off Joorbachian when the transfers to the bigger clubs came up.

Unfortunately, they got caught, but fortunately they managed to stay up. I don't know why West Ham cannot legally loan Tevez to Man Utd because isn't that the exact scenario with Mascherano & Liverpool? Infact the Mascherano loan had to ask for special dispensation from FIFA because the rules are a player cannot play for more than 2 clubs in any one season. Mascherano had played for Corinthians and West Ham already so was ineligible to play for Liverpool, or any other club. Fifa allowed the loan to go ahead.

The Tevez loan will be a whole new season. The only reason West Ham are being difficult is because they're up shit creek without a paddle if Tevez joins Man Utd, but Joorbachian gets the fee.

If things are kosher, the deal will be done this week.........lets wait and see.

All the teams that laughed down their sleeve at Utd when the Glazers bought out the plc now find themselves in the same situation .. Liverpool, Man City, probably Arsenal before too long. I'm not saying it's a great thing, but if it was such a patently bad idea other clubs wouldn't be doing it would they ?

The debt is just a fact of such deals .. like private equity 'leveraged' buy-outs of companies.

Liverpool and City aren't in debt any longer.

Sam Slater

to correct you on a few points.

2 seasons back Kia Joorabchian and MSI had an attempt to buy out WHU rejected flat out by the board in place at the time as they failed to show reasonable financial support to do so. WHU had asked joorabchian to deposit a large sum of money into a british account in order to show he`s serious intent to buy the club which he faied to do so.

Last summer joorbachian brought over 2 world class argentinians to these shores very much with the hope that he`d find them a top class club, chelsea, man utd and arsenal were all approached about taking the players on a season long loan why joorbachian found them full time employers, allflat out rejected the proposal.

On August 30th having failed miserably to secure the 2 a deal and with the transfer window 24 hours from shutting, joorabchian approached Terrance Brown then WHU chairman with regards to taking the 2 players to WHU, both partys agreed at that very time to agree to the somewhat unusual dealings in exchange to allow joorabchian to re-enter into negotiations towards a takeover, instead of now depositing money into the bank kia had secured 2 world class argies worth 50m+ as somewhat of a deposit.

The very day after the argies signed this was pretty much confirmed as WHU announced to the stock exchange they had entered into negotiations over a takeover bid.


Now to tell you where we are at now would take a life time, but west ham are now under new ownership and that new ownership have been told in no uncertain terms that they player is registered to WHU and must not be allowed to leave unless WHU obtain a reasonable cash settlement for him doing so.

If anyone is looking like theyve dug themselves in a hole they cant get out of its joorabchian, he came to england with the intent to pimp these 2 argie stars around in order to gain MSI and himself as much cash out of the 2 as possible. WHU`s legal team however have caught him out and with the money laundering charges against him at the moment going on in brazil i would suspect the big looser from all this will be kia.

As already said this deal will go through this week and will probably end up in the courts, west ham are perfectly now entitled to a transfer fee of some kind and i fully expect them to receive it as a way of kia paying up compensation.

Man u will now have a world class talent "on loan" just like we did and the hierarchy at OT will of course spout the same dribble that they did after the horward transfer in that they would never be involved in anything at all shady.

In reality though tevez will still be joorabchians player!!

But the big difference is that both Liverpool and Man City were heavily in debt and needed the takeover and investment to take them out of debt.

With United then it's completely the opposite as United were an impeccably run football club virtually debt free and their takeover has taken them into debt. Heavily into debt if the papers are to believed.

I don't see how you've corrected my on anything.

You said Joorabchian touted the pair around the PL but only found WHU. (I said they were looking for a big club, no one took a chance until WHU).

You say WHU have screwed over Joorabchian and should now be paid any transfer money. (I said WHU took the chance with these two, lying to the EPL so as to get a big fat payday when the two moved on).

I don't see where we differ really..........at least on the main points.

Of course, a few things still bug me greatly, and should pop into the conciousness of anyone reading your post. The first question is why did the Mascherano deal with Liverpool go so smoothly, when essentially it's the same deal, with the same owners/co-owners or whatever WHU are?

Secondly, if WHU are just loaning Tevez & Mascherano, why should they get any transfer fee at all?

The Mascherano loan deal is very different. Both Mascherano and Tevez joined West Ham on a year's loan. WH had the right, at any time, to terminate the loan deals or take up the option of buying either player for an agreed price(Tevez ?40m- Mascherano ?25m). In January WH terminated Mascherano's contract thus severing all ties with MSI and Mascherano. This meant Mascherano was now free to move where he(Joorabchian) liked. The only stumbling block was he had already played for two clubs in one season.

Tevez's situation is far more complex. WH did not cancel his contract at any time. The deal in which they signed him(& Mascherano) was illegal and they got punished, if you could call it that, by the Premier League. After the hearing WH had a simple choice, they could terminate his deal or renew it only this time legally. If they didn't renew Tevez would not be available for the final run in. If they did they would have to end all involvement with MSI. As we know they re-signed Tevez up on a 3yr deal ending MSI and Joorabchian's involvement. Well that's what they told the PL!

My guess is WH and Joorabchian came up with an agreement where Tevez would re-sign and then at the end of the season WH would terminate his contract allowing Joorabchian to move him on. Unfortunately for WH and Joorabchian the PL, having received heavy criticism for their handling of the whole affair, suspect this and are determined to prevent it happening no matter how Wh and MSI are trying to play it.

WH own Tevez which means, according to PL rules, United have to deal with WH. The problem is WH have not paid MSI any money for him. The pre-agreed figure of ?40m is owed to MSI. If the PL find out that WH didn't actually buy Tevez then they would once more be in breach of PL rules and would be in real trouble hence WH's public stance of 'we own the player'.

In conclusion, Joorabchian wants Tevez at Utd or his 40m. United don't want to pay up front for Tevez and are only interested in a loan. WH need to find a way of making the loan happen or give Joorabchian his money. If not then they risk being taken to court by Joorabchian and sued for the money. Which could lead to further cases being filed by both the PL and Sheff Utd who's entire case was based on the fact they felt Tevez shouldn't have been allowed to play in the run-in.

What a, slightly long winded, mess!!

Mmmmkay.....

Looks like the deals gonna go through now West Ham have been threatened with court action. West Ham will be paid 2 million.......for a 30 million rated player.

Yeah, they really own Tevez !laugh!

So Man Utd are paying MSI 5 million a year for 2 years, as a loan deal, with then the option to buy. MSI are paying West Ham the 2 million just to release Tevez's registration..

Verdict:

West Ham are guilty of lying AGAIN! (though we already knew).

West Ham are around 50 million better off by avoiding relegation, due to new tv deals this year, then this extra 2 million. Makes a mockery of the 5.5 million fine.

The Premier League are just as guilty. They failed to check the paperwork first time round, causing this mess, then let West Ham off the hook; even now are seemingly going to let the deal go through, where MSI are selling Tevez, NOT West Ham as they said was the only way.

I have a feeling West Ham will be docked points this season; probably 3 or 4, but with the money they've earned, and players coming in, along with a full season, they'll stay up anyway.........unlike the dilemma they were in last season.

It stinks, and the EPL would never have let a northern club get away with such a thing.

Cheating is part and parcel of the game----more so now because of the finances involved.

It's always one rule for bigger clubs that it is for the rest. The Premiership is just following the example set by UEFA. What Juventus gets away with, Skonta Riga would be crucified for. Big clubs are the golden goose to the authorities and TV companies.