Mascherano

[rikman]

Sorry if this has already been discussed but I can't find it anywhere.

Does anyone else think it weird that Parry was in the papers yesterday saying that he doesn't see why loan deals should take place in the PL and that with the money going round these days clubs should be able to buy players outright instead of loaning them. He said that it is only in the last couple of years that this has really started happening.

Now surely if we only had Mascherano on loan he is criticising himself and the club with his comments. Any chance we have actually signed him on a permanent deal?

[KK07]

From what I gather we signed him on loan for 18 months with a permenant deal agreed.

So it's not a loan as such as we intend to buy,I think,but I was bemused to see Parry attacking loan deals considering Mascherano is a loan.

[RedReet]

Thinking he’s aiming his point at the clubs that rely on loaning players rather than remaining self-sufficient and buying players outright. We just have Mascherano on loan as a way round the third party ownership. Although Mascherano is technically a loan signing, it’s one of convenience that maybe could have been sorted a different way if Premiership loans were still outlawed.

[Tom]

The Mash deal is the same structure as the tevez to manure deal. If WHU stop utd signing tevez and the FA back them up - then the whole mash deal could unravel too.

[Barnyard]

The Mash deal is the same structure as the tevez to manure deal. If WHU stop utd signing tevez and the FA back them up - then the whole mash deal could unravel too.

Its sort of the same except for Masc, West Ham tore up the player registration they had for him to allow him to move.

They will struggle to do this now as the premier league has said they must receive a sizeable amount of any transfer fee for Tevez do to all the problems. If they tear his registration up they are publicly saying they did not own him whatsoever which would provide more weight for Sheffield Utd.

[Tom]

From the daily heil:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/sport/football.html?in_article_id=467227&in_page_id=1779&ct=5

United are at a loss to understand why the Tevez move has stalled given the contract drawn up is almost exactly the same as the one which saw Javier Mascherano move from West Ham to Liverpool in January.

The Premier League's argument is that since Mascherano's Upton Park exit, an independent commission has ruled the Argentina pair's Hammers' contracts were in breach of regulations.

Having authorised Tevez to play in the final three games of last season - and play a major role in keeping the Upton Park outfit in the Premier League - on the basis that the agreement with Joorabchian had been ripped up, it would now involve a major climbdown - and the possibility of legal action from relegation Sheffield United - if officials were to accept the Iranian businessman retains control of the player.

The matter could yet end up in the courts, or require the involvement of FIFA, although Ferguson insists United will not submit to anything 'underhand'.

"We are following the procedure of Javier Mascherano," he said. "The essential thing for us is that everything is agreed.

"We want complete clarity in the deal, with no suspicions or anything dodgy. There is no way we will be involved in anything underhand."

And also:

Retrial required to solve saga of Tevez
14:45pm 9th July 2007 Comments Comments (10)

Jeff Powell
Murkier and murkier. Fouler and fouler. The Carlos Tevez affair is plumbing depths so fetid that, unless justice is dragged screaming from this quagmire, the Premier League will be in danger of drowning in its own effluent when it re-opens for dodgy business next month.

This is a catastrophe in the making, not only for the one sport which excites even wilder passions than sex among the people of this country but also for Britain's longheld and jealously guarded reputation for fair play.

By and large, despite all the muck thrown in its direction and the ill-considered antics of a few of its most famous practitioners, English football is a game of integrity. Certainly, it occupies morally higher ground than the Italian home of the world champions. A widely-held conviction that our national game is straight is fundamental to its mass popularity and therefore its astronomical rewards.

The Premier League will continue to compromise that belief at its own peril and to the financial jeopardy of its clubs. Everywhere — with the natural exception of Upton Park and its environs — there is a strong public sense that West Ham cheated, that Sheffield United have been robbed and that this matter should be put right before the multi-billion pound show goes back on the road.

Meanwhile, as Tevez waits impatiently to be flogged on to Manchester United by football's equivalent of a horse trader, the iniquity of the wrist-slapping failure to dock West Ham points for riding the Argentine's irregular goals on the way to their escape from relegation comes ever closer to being legally exposed.

Sheffield United are heading for the High Court this Friday in hot pursuit of their appeal for reinstatement to the Premier League in place of the Hammers.

That is the one place to which they can subpoena the player's 'commercial' owner, Kia Joorabchian, thereby obliging him to give evidence and to disclose the documentation which he has been hinting will prove that Tevez kept West Ham up in breach of the Premier League's own rules.

Not only that, but the League executives squirming on this hook, Sir Dave Richards and Richard Scudamore, face being hauled into court by Joorabchian if they try to prevent him being paid by United for supplying Tevez Yet unless they attempt to force the Premiership champions to hand over the bulk of these 'loan' fees to West Ham, they will be damned by tacit admission that Tevez was under third-party influence in contravention of their regulations.

Catch 22, gentlemen.

There is only one way out and it is the recourse which the governing body of the world game would prefer. FIFA are furiously opposed to football disputes going to court and will be urging the Football Association to help the Premier League find a solution.


Frankly, it is astonishing that the FA have not intervened. But then this is the body which lured England's major teams away from the old four-division structure into forming the FA Premier League, only to hand over power to the club chairmen who could not wait to exercise their vested interests.

UEFA, for its part, are giving thanks that Liverpool lost the Champions League Final. Otherwise, knowing how the Italians and the country's former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi operate, be sure that AC Milan would be questioning the eligibility for Europe's blue riband event of another of Joorabchian's hot Argentine properties. Javier Mascherano took the same loan route from Buenos Aires to Merseyside, via West Ham, which Tevez is following to Manchester. If the Premier League refuse to ratify Tevez's next move, they must expect United to cry foul and double standards.

Catch 23, gentlemen.

So what is that solitary escape hatch? Before this can get to court — where no judge worth his wig could help but find against their Star Chamber injustice — the League must ask the FA to join them in forming a joint commission and calling a re-trial on the grounds of fresh evidence from Joorabchian.

They simply cannot go on hiding behind the independent tribunal's equally enfeebled failure to enforce a second hearing despite finding the Premier League at fault. Nor can they claim it is too late because the fixtures have been published. Given a little fine tuning to avoid local clashes, Sheffield and West Ham can swap their Premiership and Championship programmes.

There are calls for the heads of Richards and Scudamore but, if a sacking offence was committed, perhaps it was that of naively assuming they could impose a token fine for West Ham's malpractice and deceit and all would be forgotten. That was never going to happen, not just because Sheffield United are up for the fight but because they have offended the rule of law as it applies all the way down to the grass roots of the game.

On Hackney Marshes, just up the East End road from Upton Park, the punishment is swift and unavoidable for any team caught fielding that well-known utility player, A Ringer. They lose the points or they are booted out of the cup.

This weekend a source 'close' to Joorabchian, by way of making it clear West Ham had no legal right to tear up their agreement unilaterally in a devious attempt to get round the rules, came up with this candidate for Analogy of the Year: 'If you borrow a car from someone and you tear up the log-book, that doesn't make you the owner.'

If the men in charge of English football want to avoid being run off the block like so many dodgy used car salesmen, they have to right a wrong which is undermining the people's confidence in their game.

[RedReet]

They will struggle to do this now as the premier league has said they must receive a sizeable amount of any transfer fee for Tevez do to all the problems. If they tear his registration up they are publicly saying they did not own him whatsoever which would provide more weight for Sheffield Utd.

That's brilliant, I hope it all goes pear shaped for them.

[Lecter]

The Mash deal is the same structure as the tevez to manure deal. If WHU stop utd signing tevez and the FA back them up - then the whole mash deal could unravel too.

In principle it is. However I believe Tevez & Mascheranos ownership situation at West Ham was different

I'm sure I read somewhere recently that one of the reasons West Ham werent docked points was because the irregularities regarding the 3rd party ownership of Tevez had been removed

[Revo]

beginnin to think now that sheff utd really did get ****ed and parry did a wonderful job of navigating that mascharano deal

[Laz]

That £5m fine West Ham paid could be the best deal they ever made. Not only do they guarantee themselves a minimum £30m TV pay deal even if they get relegated this season but they could land another £20m for Tevez!

Surely there's no way they could be relegated before the new season after the FA let them off twice already.

Not a bad gamble that.

[red g]

beginnin to think now that sheff utd really did get ****ed and parry did a wonderful job of navigating that mascharano deal

how often has that been said on these forums!!!

[AFII]

The difference is that we own Mascherano's economic rights and playing registration this season.

West Ham own Tevez playing registration and MSI owns his economic rights.

I don't know if it means anything if the case go to court.

[Guest]

how often has that been said on these forums!!!

I certainly never indulged into Parry bashing before.

[homer1]

Even if they do follow the same steps as we did with the Chief, what's the chances of them getting f*cked around the same way we were with Javier waiting an eternity for the red tape to come through??

On a semi related note, read the scare stories a week or two back about Mascherano possibly leaving as it's only a loan deal etc etc and thought no more of it as he seems very grateful to Rafa for showing so much faith. Got me thinking though, with Sissoko signing his new deal when he could easily have been seen as "surplus to requirements", could the reason he was retained be due to uncertainty over Mascherano staying beyond this season?

[Snigger]

The Premier League and UEFA both rubber stamped the Mascher deal so it can't be unravelled without showing complete incompetence on their part. I believe the issue is who owns the commercial rights.

I would like to know the difference though.