Tevez deal VS Mascherano deal

PHB

But none of us know what was igned by who and when. How do you know that the contract isn't 'legal' ?
The only people who know for sure are West Ham, Tevez, his agent and the Premier League and two of those are 100% sure it's in order.

Really? Do you honestly believe that the PL and West Ham actually think they own Tevez?

Revelation Joe

marco_polo wrote:

Yeah right :rolleyes:

Answer me this, If they are so sure then why have Man United not been censured for tapping up Tevez.

Surely West Ham ought to have complained to the PL by now about this as they have not given permission for "their" player to talk to Utd.

Has he talked to them? Or has his agent talked to them? Bear in mind he's been playing in the Copa America for the last three weeks...

Revelation Joe

PHB wrote:

Really? Do you honestly believe that the PL and West Ham actually think they own Tevez?

I believe that they own his playing registration

Mitch Connor

Revelation Joe wrote:

But none of us know what was igned by who and when. How do you know that the contract isn't 'legal' ?
The only people who know for sure are West Ham, Tevez, his agent and the Premier League and two of those are 100% sure it's in order.

The United lawyers and MSI Lawyers are 100% sure West Ham have NO legal claim over the player.

Mitch Connor

Revelation Joe wrote:

Has he talked to them? Or has his agent talked to them? Bear in mind he's been playing in the Copa America for the last three weeks...

What difference does playing in the Copa America make?

Tevez has SAID he has agreed a deal with United.

United say the deal has been agreed.

MSI say the deal is agreed.

Only lies from West Ham and the premiership are holding it up.

I hope the PL and West Ham are sued for everything they are worth over this crap.

PHB

Revelation Joe wrote:

I believe that they own his playing registration

That's because the PL ruled as such, whether they were right to is the question.
Oh yeh, aside from that, Tevez doesn't think West Ham own him either

marco_polo

Revelation Joe wrote:

Has he talked to them? Or has his agent talked to them? Bear in mind he's been playing in the Copa America for the last three weeks...

His agent has been holding very public talks with them for the last few week, but I'm sure Carlos has no idea.

Just surprised that West Ham haven't objected more about this. Seems a bit unusual seeing as how that they have not given Tevez permission to leave West Ham. How very nice of them.

marco_polo

Revelation Joe wrote:

I believe that they own his playing registration

Which is worthless

Mitch Connor

marco_polo wrote:

His agent has been holding very public talks with them for the last few week, but I'm sure Carlos has no idea.

Just surprised that West Ham haven't objected more about this. Seems a bit unusual seeing as how that they have not given Tevez permission to leave West Ham. How very nice of them.

Why are you sure Carlos has no idea, when he has stated he it will be brilliant to play for United and that the deal has been agreed and that he has given his word he will sign for United and has requested West Ham let him sign for United.

That really doesn't sound like someone who doesn't know whatis going on.

marco_polo

Tauren wrote:

Why are you sure Carlos has no idea, when he has stated he it will be brilliant to play for United and that the deal has been agreed and that he has given his word he will sign for United and has requested West Ham let him sign for United.

That really doesn't sound like someone who doesn't know whatis going on.

Sarcasm. Doesn't come across as well in the written word.

Mitch Connor

marco_polo wrote:

Sarcasm. Doesn't come across as well in the written word.

appologies.

Revelation Joe

Look, transfers have to be agreed by three parties - the selling club, the buying club and the player. If any one of them doesn't agree the deal, then it doesn't go through.
West Ham don't want to agree the deal as it stands and as such, the deal won't be done in it's current form. If it's modified to suit all parties, then Tevez will join Man. U
Until then, he stays at West Ham

Mitch Connor

Revelation Joe wrote:

Look, transfers have to be agreed by three parties - the selling club, the buying club and the player. If any one of them doesn't agree the deal, then it doesn't go through.
West Ham don't want to agree the deal as it stands and as such, the deal won't be done in it's current form. If it's modified to suit all parties, then Tevez will join Man. U
Until then, he stays at West Ham

In order for West Ham to be the selling club, they would need to own Tevez. THEY DO NOT OWN TEVEZ.

marco_polo

Revelation Joe wrote:

Look, transfers have to be agreed by three parties - the selling club, the buying club and the player. If any one of them doesn't agree the deal, then it doesn't go through.
West Ham don't want to agree the deal as it stands and as such, the deal won't be done in it's current form. If it's modified to suit all parties, then Tevez will join Man. U
Until then, he stays at West Ham

I think West Ham would love to get rid of him. Question is can the deal be modified in a such a way that the PL can avoid having to punish West Ham again for a further breach of the rules. Any further wrongdoing from the date it was supposedly settled would result in a new disciplinary proceedure as far as I see, which would almost certainly result in relegation.

Revelation Joe

Tauren wrote:

In order for West Ham to be the selling club, they would need to own Tevez. THEY DO NOT OWN TEVEZ.

From Kia Joorabchian when Tevez first signed for West Ham;
"The transfer of Tevez and Mascherano is a permanent transfer for an undisclosed fee and undisclosed terms. It's not a loan or anything like that. There is no clause for them to play or not to play. That is totally the manager's choice. If the manager doesn't think that they are good enough to play in any game, or for tactical reasons, then that is the manager's choice"

OK, this implies that West Ham would own both players, however KJ is now saying that he still owns the 'economic rights' to Tevez. So either he was lying then or he's lying now.
Whether you think that owning the player's registration is worthless or not (as was mentioned by another poster earlier), it doesn't alter the fact that West Ham do own it and if Tevez wants to play for another club, West Ham will have to release it, which they don't want to do and are entilted to keep hold of if they so wish.

Mitch Connor

Revelation Joe wrote:

From Kia Joorabchian when Tevez first signed for West Ham;
"The transfer of Tevez and Mascherano is a permanent transfer for an undisclosed fee and undisclosed terms. It's not a loan or anything like that. There is no clause for them to play or not to play. That is totally the manager's choice. If the manager doesn't think that they are good enough to play in any game, or for tactical reasons, then that is the manager's choice"

OK, this implies that West Ham would own both players, however KJ is now saying that he still owns the 'economic rights' to Tevez. So either he was lying then or he's lying now.
Whether you think that owning the player's registration is worthless or not (as was mentioned by another poster earlier), it doesn't alter the fact that West Ham do own it and if Tevez wants to play for another club, West Ham will have to release it, which they don't want to do and are entilted to keep hold of if they so wish.

Yep - and they are lies from Kia.

Do you honestly think Mascherano was SOLD by West Ham to Liverpool?

And they are, seemingly, entitled to be sued by MSI if it comes down to it. West Ham paid no money for Tevez, or Mascherano, they don't and didn't own either. MSI do.

If it wasn't the case, the United lawyers, who have been working on this for months along with the MSI lawyers, wouldn't be acting the way they are.

Anyway, we'll see soon enough. It will all get very interesting tomorrow.

Tauren

Tauren wrote:

It will all get very interesting tomorrow.

Why? What'd I miss?!

marco_polo

Deleted User wrote:

Why? What'd I miss?!

Sheff Utd kicking off their court acion against the PL. It looks like they may well be provided with documentation on the deal from MSI.

Mitch Connor

Sheffield United are in some court hearing tomorrow that will probably ersult in Kia Joorabchain releasing ALL the documents, thus proving exactly what West Ham signed. The MSI and Man United lawyers are 100% confident they are in the right and that west ham have no legal claim to Tevez - which probably means the contracts will get West Ham and the PL in a hole heap of crap.

As a friend said, i would not be surprised if West Ham and the PL were 'turtling the turd' right about now.

marco_polo

Link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/football/teams/s/sheff_utd/6270920.stm


A source close to Joorabchian said: "If the judge rules all the paperwork must be made public we will be forced to co-operate.

"We have no idea how significant the paperwork may be. All we know is we have done nothing wrong."

Very co-operative chap, doing his public duty so willingly. Bolded is my favourite bit of the article. No idea at all honest

Oooooh tasty!!! Lookin forward to that!! Im sure theres a few PL figures packing suitcases and selling assets and planning their escape right about now!!!

Mr Alan

Tauren wrote:

Yep - and they are lies from Kia.

Do you honestly think Mascherano was SOLD by West Ham to Liverpool?

And they are, seemingly, entitled to be sued by MSI if it comes down to it. West Ham paid no money for Tevez, or Mascherano, they don't and didn't own either. MSI do.

If it wasn't the case, the United lawyers, who have been working on this for months along with the MSI lawyers, wouldn't be acting the way they are.

Anyway, we'll see soon enough. It will all get very interesting tomorrow.

tauren: do you not admit that it is SLIGHTLY funny, that you are saying he is lying in that statement, how do you possibly know that?!That statement from him that was made when they signed for West Ham, so you'll have to admit that it is even a possibility that West Ham do have some right to him?!

You seem to taking the word of this MSI fella, who seems like the dodgiest bloke around and tevez, who doesn't seem to have a clue wat position he is in! (westham,england,inter,real who?! where?!)

No one knows what is going on,end of story.

On a different note, if west ham have an option to buy Tevez for 40 million, does that mean thats what United will be paying!? if so, surely that is WAAAAAYYYYYYY too expensive???

marco_polo

millersangel wrote:

tauren: do you not admit that it is SLIGHTLY funny, that you are saying he is lying in that statement, how do you possibly know that?!That statement from him that was made when they signed for West Ham, so you'll have to admit that it is even a possibility that West Ham do have some right to him?!

You seem to taking the word of this MSI fella, who seems like the dodgiest bloke around and tevez, who doesn't seem to have a clue wat position he is in! (westham,england,inter,real who?! where?!)

No one knows what is going on,end of story.

On a different note, if west ham have an option to buy Tevez for 40 million, does that mean thats what United will be paying!? if so, surely that is WAAAAAYYYYYYY too expensive???

Clearly he is a slightly dodgy bloke. But if it was the case that West Ham have rights and don't want to sell him, then why has a deal been struck with united in the full public view? This strongly suggests that West Ham do not own the "economic" rights to him.

Basically everything was hunky dory until the PL stepped in and told west ham to assert their non existant "rights" to the player, to cover their own asses.

Also if the €40m clause is true, I'll bet it was Tevez who asked for it to be put in to make sure West Ham could not afford him at the end of the season;).

millersangel

millersangel wrote:

No one knows what is going on,end of story.

In other words u had no reason to make this thread!!!:D Jokin


Im sure we'll hear an awful lot about this from tomorrow evening onwards.....could turn into a carnival

Mr Alan

marco_polo wrote:

Clearly he is a slightly dodgy bloke. But if it was the case that West Ham have rights and don't want to sell him, then why has a deal been struck with united in the full public view? This strongly suggests that West Ham do not own the "economic" rights to him.

Basically everything was hunky dory until the PL stepped in and told west ham to assert their non existant "rights" to the player, to cover their own asses.

Also if the €40m clause is true, I'll bet it was Tevez who asked for it to be put in to make sure West Ham could not afford him at the end of the season;).

But the quotes from the dodgy agent from the start of the season seem to suggest that west ham DO have rights to him.

And in that quote he seems fairly convinced that it was not a loan deal.

I just find it funny that people are taking what he says now about West Ham having no right to Tevez as being definately the truth, and the quotes from the start of the season as being lies.

Surely its possible that west ham do have rights to him and this bloke is just trying to push the sale to United through?!

marco_polo

millersangel wrote:

But the quotes from the dodgy agent from the start of the season seem to suggest that west ham DO have rights to him.

And in that quote he seems fairly convinced that it was not a loan deal.

Because that is what the premier league wanted to hear.

millersangel wrote:

I just find it funny that people are taking what he says now about West Ham having no right to Tevez as being definately the truth, and the quotes from the start of the season as being lies.

Surely its possible that west ham do have rights to him and this bloke is just trying to push the sale to United through?!

The evidence seems to suggest that this is not the case. I find the opposite view funny.

Maybe I'm just crazy, but if I was chairman of a premiership club and some bloke was trying to flog off one of my players in full public view, I think would have made a bit of a fuss in the week or so before before the premier league got involved.

* What would I have done at work today without this thread *

Mr Alan

marco_polo wrote:

Because that is what the premier league wanted to hear.

The evidence seems to suggest that this is not the case. I find the opposite view funny.

Maybe I'm just crazy, but if I was chairman of a premiership club and some bloke was trying to flog off one of my players in full public view, I think would have made a bit of a fuss in the week or so before before the premier league got involved.

* What would I have done at work today without this thread *

how do you know the only reason he said that just because its wat the league wanted to hear??!

Wat evidence? if anything the evidence that was presented to the PL proved he was owned by West Ham, which in turn allowed him to play towards the end of the season. I don't think it was quite as simple as West Ham tearing up the contract as some people on here seem to think was the case. The PL ain't that stupid (hopefully!)

marco_polo

millersangel wrote:

how do you know the only reason he said that just because its wat the league wanted to hear??!

He made that statement at the start of last season. If it was true that he was a Wst Ham player then, what was all that fuss about with a few games left in the season.

Wat evidence? if anything the evidence that was presented to the PL proved he was owned by West Ham, which in turn allowed him to play towards the end of the season.

Look like some of it got mislaid on the way to that PL meeting. I'd wager the bits they ommited/shredded said otherwise.

millersangel wrote:

The PL ain't that stupid (hopefully!)

Boy are you gonna be disappointed when this all comes out in the wash.

Where is the tapping up charge against united then if west ham are in control of the player? Why were West Ham happy for him to talk to United until the premier league got involved in the transfer?

jesus_thats_gre

Tauren wrote:

In order for West Ham to be the selling club, they would need to own Tevez. THEY DO NOT OWN TEVEZ.

Can you explain the hold up so? Oh yeah, thats right, they are 1 of 3 parties and hold the players registration. As far as the FA are concerned, that means they basically own him. It isn't exactly rocket science.

marco_polo

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

Can you explain the hold up so? Oh yeah, thats right, they are 1 of 3 parties and hold the players registration. As far as the FA are concerned, that means they basically own him. It isn't exactly rocket science.

The registration means he is registered to play football for them nothing more nothing less. The FA haven't got involved yet just the Premier league and you have to question their impartiality now. I hope West Ham have the "deeds" for Tevez to prove their ownership.

Great news lower league clubs too they can keep all those youngsters loaned from premier league clubs now. Transfer prices had been going through the roof this summer.

Mitch Connor

millersangel wrote:

tauren: do you not admit that it is SLIGHTLY funny, that you are saying he is lying in that statement, how do you possibly know that?!That statement from him that was made when they signed for West Ham, so you'll have to admit that it is even a possibility that West Ham do have some right to him?!

You seem to taking the word of this MSI fella, who seems like the dodgiest bloke around and tevez, who doesn't seem to have a clue wat position he is in! (westham,england,inter,real who?! where?!)

No one knows what is going on,end of story.

On a different note, if west ham have an option to buy Tevez for 40 million, does that mean thats what United will be paying!? if so, surely that is WAAAAAYYYYYYY too expensive???

The guy is dodgy, i don't like the likes of MSI, don't want them in football, but i am certain the statement made right after the duo signed are lies, simply because the United lawyers have been looking into this for a few months now, and they wouldn't be certain of their case unless it was true.

Mr Alan

but surely the West Ham and PL lawyers are no slouches either?!

Mitch Connor

millersangel wrote:

but surely the West Ham and PL lawyers are no slouches either?!

I honestly believe West Ham are lying - and i thought so before United looked to be signing Tevez.

I have said all along i do not believe West Ham own Tevez (considering they paid no money for him). I said the PL decision to not dock West Ham points was wrong. I believe the PL screwed up then, and they are just trying to cover their tracks since then.

Also....the west ham lawyers are the ones that OK'd an illegal contract in the first place, and seem to think ripping a contract up actually constitutes a legal move.

Mitch Connor

Also, if what Joorabchian originally said was true - the PL would never hava had a reason to fine West Ham 5.5million.

Mr Alan

as i said before, when they refered to 'ripping up a contract' i dont think that was actually meant literally.

i don't nescessarily disagree with you, i think west ham should have been docked points and i think everyone knew there was something dodgy when the two lads signed in the first place.

BUT i think it is possible that watever happened in March or whenever all the stuff about tevez came out, might mean West Ham have some right to him. Remember at the time Kia didn't come out and say, Tevez is mine,not west hams. which surely he would have done of west ham were claiming to own him when they didnt?

perhaps they came to some deal to avoid embarrasment on both sides and west ham bought him outright as was originally claimed. remember, he was hardly settin the world alight at this stage! now kia has realised he has messed up and perhaps he is backtracking realising he messed up with tevez. he is hardly the most honest character.

all this is just speculation and theories, but thats all anyone can work with cause no one knows whats goin on.

plus didnt tevez score 7 goals last season playing the majority of games? does that justify 40 million price tag??

Attractive Nun

Plus, why in the name of god would MSI arrange a transfer of two of their players - two of the most sought after and valuable players in world football - to West Ham, for free, and hand over all rights to the players to the club - allowing West Ham to hold Tevez to ransom as they are now trying to do? And if the deal was a permanent and 'standard' deal as was claimed, then how has Mascherano gone to Liverpool without WHU seeing any money? I'm not going to pretend I have any idea what's going on with this transfer, but it is surely blatantly obvious that the original deal wasn't as Kia said it was. And how West Ham could unilaterally change this by "tearing up the contract" or whatever doesn't strike me as in any way legal.

Tbh, I have no idea what West Ham are up to here - I don't know what they want to get out of this as they clearly, clearly can't be entitled to Tevez' transfer fee since they never paid any money, and obviously they won't be able to hang on to Tevez the player. I used to like West Ham as a club, but this **** is ridiculous. I hope they get royally screwed in the courts.

Mr Alan

SSN are reporting Tevez has agreed to join Utd and will have medical on Wednesday. Is this news? We all knew he agreed, they don't mention what West Ham have to say about it!

zAbbo

Hitlers not happy at the whole affair either.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jg5HsG7AN1Y

zing

Attractive Nun wrote:

how has Mascherano gone to Liverpool without WHU seeing any money?

Quite easy if all parties agreed to cancel his contract with West Ham.

clearly can't be entitled to Tevez' transfer fee since they never paid any money

I've said it before and I'll say it again - I think people need to get over the whole 'West Ham can't own him as they've not paid any money for him' thing. How many players are signed for free each season - do the clubs that sign those players not own the players registrations then ? Are the not entitled to a transfer fee if they in turn decided to sell that player ? The situation may be different here but the point is valid and remains.

The fact is none of us know how the original deals for Tevez & Mascherano were structured financially - were they initial loan deals with options to buy after a year ? Were they no money up front but installments to be paid every 12 months - which iirc would be around Aug 31st ? Maybe it was a 12 month supply of jelly beans up front and cash every year after that ? Maybe it was ...

Or lets look at it another way. If you buy a house/car/whatever on a no money up front and no payments for 6 months can your bank/building society/local loan shark decide to sell said house/car/whatever without your approval regardless of whether you've yet made a payment installment ? Not unless you've defaulted on payments or are in some other way in breach of your agreement with that party. Or what if you decide to sell it yourself before you've made a payment - who gets the money from the sale ? You do of course as you were the registered owner. Naturally you'd have to in turn (or before hand) pay for said item in full but that's irrelevant to who would get the money from the sale transaction.

I can easily see how West Ham could be entitled to a transfer fee if the player is to permanently move to Utd but may have to hand it all back to Joorabchian just as quick. On the other hand if West Ham were to loan him to United then there would presumably be no such issues but that would also presumably leave West Ham with some control over the player which Utd & Joorabchian don't want and would also presumably mean that West Ham would have to pay for the player (according to whatever agreement there is between West Ham & MSI/Joorabchian and his buddies or face legal action for non payment).
Or West Ham do as they did with Mascherano and cancel the contract but they don't seem to want to do that..

Think this saga could drag on a bit if West Ham continue digging their heals in and could get very interesting if Joorabchian hands over whatever documentation he is threatening to hand over.

jesus_thats_gre

marco_polo wrote:

The registration means he is registered to play football for them nothing more nothing less. The FA haven't got involved yet just the Premier league and you have to question their impartiality now. I hope West Ham have the "deeds" for Tevez to prove their ownership.

Great news lower league clubs too they can keep all those youngsters loaned from premier league clubs now. Transfer prices had been going through the roof this summer.

They signed him as oppossed to taking him on loan, there is a difference believe it or not...

zing

zing wrote:

Think this saga could drag on a bit if West Ham continue digging their heals in and could get very interesting if Joorabchian hands over whatever documentation he is threatening to hand over.

And here's another twist..
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premiership/article2067289.ece

jesus_thats_gre

zing wrote:

And here's another twist..
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/football/premiership/article2067289.ece

Jaysus..

county

turning into a circus this tevez deal

zAbbo

Yeah, I'm surprised (well not really) that Ferguson is getting messed up in this, has he even spoken to West Ham ?

Mitch Connor

zabbo wrote:

Yeah, I'm surprised (well not really) that Ferguson is getting messed up in this, has he even spoken to West Ham ?

The United lawyers are quite confident that there is no real reason to talk to west ham about it (having seen all the contracts) so i would assume Ferguson trusts them.

The Rooster

A federal judge in Brazil charged Kia Joorabchian with money-launder-ing and being part of a criminal gang for his role in the partnership between Media Sports Investments (MSI), the London-based sports management company that claims to own the economic rights to Tévez, and Corinthians, the Brazilian football club

Its twist after twist

It seems certain that Tevez will have his medical with ManU on Wednesday.

But I doubt very much that will be the end of it - I'm positive United will get him, but I can't figure out exactly how, as West Ham have no choice but to continue the facade that they own Tevez. Wouldnt be surprised if its ends up with the Hammers getting a 2 or 3 point penalty for this new season.

Savman

Sheff Utd be lovin this.

marco_polo

jesus_thats_gre wrote:

They signed him as oppossed to taking him on loan, there is a difference believe it or not...

I am well aware of the difference. I ask again where is the tapping up charge against United, since he is having a medical over the next few days without West Ham agreeing he can go?

marco_polo

zing wrote:

Quite easy if all parties agreed to cancel his contract with West Ham.

And why did West Ham let Mascherano leave for next to nothing in that instance? Did they donate a £15m player to liverpool out of the goodness of their hearts?

zing wrote:

I've said it before and I'll say it again - I think people need to get over the whole 'West Ham can't own him as they've not paid any money for him' thing. How many players are signed for free each season - do the clubs that sign those players not own the players registrations then ? Are the not entitled to a transfer fee if they in turn decided to sell that player ? The situation may be different here but the point is valid and remains.

The fact is none of us know how the original deals for Tevez & Mascherano were structured financially - were they initial loan deals with options to buy after a year ? Were they no money up front but installments to be paid every 12 months - which iirc would be around Aug 31st ? Maybe it was a 12 month supply of jelly beans up front and cash every year after that ? Maybe it was ...

A free transfer is a completely different scenario so I am not sure how the point remains the same. Yes from a footballing point of view the PL insist that he is WHs player because hold his registration. However the original agreement between West Ham and MSI clearly does not involve West Ham Having any "economic rights" to the player.

zing wrote:

Or lets look at it another way. If you buy a house/car/whatever on a no money up front and no payments for 6 months can your bank/building society/local loan shark decide to sell said house/car/whatever without your approval regardless of whether you've yet made a payment installment ? Not unless you've defaulted on payments or are in some other way in breach of your agreement with that party. Or what if you decide to sell it yourself before you've made a payment - who gets the money from the sale ? You do of course as you were the registered owner. Naturally you'd have to in turn (or before hand) pay for said item in full but that's irrelevant to who would get the money from the sale transaction.

I can easily see how West Ham could be entitled to a transfer fee if the player is to permanently move to Utd but may have to hand it all back to Joorabchian just as quick. On the other hand if West Ham were to loan him to United then there would presumably be no such issues but that would also presumably leave West Ham with some control over the player which Utd & Joorabchian don't want and would also presumably mean that West Ham would have to pay for the player (according to whatever agreement there is between West Ham & MSI/Joorabchian and his buddies or face legal action for non payment).
Or West Ham do as they did with Mascherano and cancel the contract but they don't seem to want to do that..

Think this saga could drag on a bit if West Ham continue digging their heals in and could get very interesting if Joorabchian hands over whatever documentation he is threatening to hand over.

Isn't that pretty much the whole problem though? If West Ham have to give all the money from the transfer over to MSI then they are admitting that those third party agreements were still in place despite them instisting that all was above board after their disciplinary hearing and fine a few months ago.

One thing is for sure we won't be seeing any such deals with dodgy South American companies again for a long long time, and that can only be a good thing for football in the long run I suppose.

PHB

This is getting funny Luckily money laundering in Brazil won't affect his position in England, it'll just make it a little more difficult to work with Kia.

Personally I think the solution will be something along the lines of,
Everybody accepts that West Ham 'own' Tevez, West Ham 'loan' him to United for two years, with an option to buy. Kia takes West Ham to court for breach of contract, get's all the amount United are paying, minus 5.5 million to cover the fine they got, and everybody is happy, United get Tevez, West Ham get their fine covered and no points deduction, the PL go on pretending, and Kia gets his money. The only people who gets screwed are Sheffield United