I know a fair number of lawyers, and most of them seem to have made a disparaging comment at one time or another about the contracts class that they took in law school. I'm starting to understand why.
The latest development in the Carlos Tévez transfer situation regards an amended contract that West Ham offered after Eggert Magnusson's takeover of the club. Kia Joorabchian's lawyers claimed during a High Court hearing Tuesday that the agreement allows Joorabchian's two offshore companies, MSI and Just Sports, to pay West Ham £100,000 to release the Argentinian striker from his contract. West Ham, however, deny that the agreement is valid. The Telegraph reports that the Premier League confirmed West Ham's contention that the amended agreement was not signed by the player and his representatives when it was first offered to them in December. The Premiership said they received a copy of the contract -- not signed by Tévez or Joorabchian -- as evidence for the independent commission that investigated the signings of Tévez and Javier Mascherano. That's a lot more detail than the Times provided, with their headline saying: "West Ham feel the heat after documents shed new light on Tévez saga." I'd argue that, with what we know of them, those documents don't tell us anything except that there is another matter for these two parties to dispute. The Telegraph also said that lawyers for both sides were still discussing a settlement, but the Guardian expressed doubt that the gap between how much Joorabchian is willing to pay and how much the Premiership will expect West Ham to insist upon in order to settle. The BBC reports that West Ham want £3 million.
Meanwhile, Sir Alex Ferguson acknowledged his frustration over the dragging out of the matter. I guess Sir Alex is not used to having to wait to have his way. Eidur Gudjohnsen hasn't decided yet whether having his way includes a move to Upton Park. The Hammers would like to add the Barcelona striker as a replacement for Tévez. Gudjohnsen's father and agent said that his son is definitely considering such a move, in part because of the Iceland connection between Magnusson and Gudjohnsen.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Thursday, July 26, 2007
More multi-millionaires?
Sorry again that it's been so long since I last wrote here. A million things seemed to have happened over the last two weeks, so I won't waste too much time on my absence. I've been busy at work and had a quick trip to Wisconsin with friends. But I've been reading and watching the news on the Irons. So here goes.
Midfielder Kieron Dyer is the latest high-wage player linked in a move to West Ham. The Times reports that he may be had by West Ham for £5 million. The Independent reports that West Ham are the favorite to sign the midfielder, who wants to move from Tyneside down to London to be closer to his young family, which is located in his hometown of Ipswich. Dyer is needed to fill in for the injured Laurent Faubert, whose Achilles injury is expected to keep him out six months. The Guardian reports that Tottenham will make a bid "to rival" West Ham's, although some of the other reports indicate that Tottenham's wage-scale will make it tough to entice Dyer, who reportedly makes £80,000 per week. Meanwhile, Newcastle manager Sam Allardyce, who has midfield problems of his own with the injury to new signee Joey Barton and the sale of Scott Parker to West Ham, wishes he could do something to convince Dyer to stay, but adds that he understands that Dyer feels the need to move closer to home to take care of personal issues.
West Ham's midfield is actually starting to seem a bit crowded. Even with Faubert's injury, West Ham have new signees Parker and Freddie Ljungberg to go along with holdovers Mark Noble, Luis Boa Morte, Matthew Etherington and Lee Bowyer, at least. Of course, the Hammers also sent out two of their top midfielders in Nigel Reo-Coker and Yossi Benayoun. (I caught Aston Villa's friendly away to Toronto FC, and Reo-Coker helped set up a goal in Villa's 4-2 win.)
On the striker front, West Ham don't appear to be done after adding Craig Bellamy earlier this summer. The Independent reported Thursday that Bolton striker Nicolas Anelka may be part of "Eggert Magnusson's revolution" at West Ham with a £12 million offer but the Guardian says in Friday's papers that Magnusson has assurred Bolton that Anelka will have to watch the revolution on TV (except for the two matches between the clubs). The Guardian also reports that West Ham are more likely to make a bid for Icelandic striker Eidur Gudjohnsen from Barcelona.
The one thing that still nags at me is the idea that West Ham may be spending all of their money on players in their late 20s or early 30s, with the exception of Faubert, who is 23. It's something that you see in baseball, too, where players can become free agents after six years of play in the majors. They get paid for past performance rather than what they can be expected to do going forward. It's excting, at first, to see your team signing players whose names you recognize as quality, but it doesn't always work out that way. Then again, when the Hammers missed out on 23-year-old Darren Bent at £16 million, I thought that perhaps Tottenham had a case of the winner's curse. But at least they spent the money on a younger player who can be expected to grow. That's the risk that helped the player who's in his late 20s, I guess, as managers prefer to spend their big bucks on "proven talent," and that's no different in football than in baseball or any other sport.
Midfielder Kieron Dyer is the latest high-wage player linked in a move to West Ham. The Times reports that he may be had by West Ham for £5 million. The Independent reports that West Ham are the favorite to sign the midfielder, who wants to move from Tyneside down to London to be closer to his young family, which is located in his hometown of Ipswich. Dyer is needed to fill in for the injured Laurent Faubert, whose Achilles injury is expected to keep him out six months. The Guardian reports that Tottenham will make a bid "to rival" West Ham's, although some of the other reports indicate that Tottenham's wage-scale will make it tough to entice Dyer, who reportedly makes £80,000 per week. Meanwhile, Newcastle manager Sam Allardyce, who has midfield problems of his own with the injury to new signee Joey Barton and the sale of Scott Parker to West Ham, wishes he could do something to convince Dyer to stay, but adds that he understands that Dyer feels the need to move closer to home to take care of personal issues.
West Ham's midfield is actually starting to seem a bit crowded. Even with Faubert's injury, West Ham have new signees Parker and Freddie Ljungberg to go along with holdovers Mark Noble, Luis Boa Morte, Matthew Etherington and Lee Bowyer, at least. Of course, the Hammers also sent out two of their top midfielders in Nigel Reo-Coker and Yossi Benayoun. (I caught Aston Villa's friendly away to Toronto FC, and Reo-Coker helped set up a goal in Villa's 4-2 win.)
On the striker front, West Ham don't appear to be done after adding Craig Bellamy earlier this summer. The Independent reported Thursday that Bolton striker Nicolas Anelka may be part of "Eggert Magnusson's revolution" at West Ham with a £12 million offer but the Guardian says in Friday's papers that Magnusson has assurred Bolton that Anelka will have to watch the revolution on TV (except for the two matches between the clubs). The Guardian also reports that West Ham are more likely to make a bid for Icelandic striker Eidur Gudjohnsen from Barcelona.
The one thing that still nags at me is the idea that West Ham may be spending all of their money on players in their late 20s or early 30s, with the exception of Faubert, who is 23. It's something that you see in baseball, too, where players can become free agents after six years of play in the majors. They get paid for past performance rather than what they can be expected to do going forward. It's excting, at first, to see your team signing players whose names you recognize as quality, but it doesn't always work out that way. Then again, when the Hammers missed out on 23-year-old Darren Bent at £16 million, I thought that perhaps Tottenham had a case of the winner's curse. But at least they spent the money on a younger player who can be expected to grow. That's the risk that helped the player who's in his late 20s, I guess, as managers prefer to spend their big bucks on "proven talent," and that's no different in football than in baseball or any other sport.
Never a doubt
Kia Joorabchian's firms, MSI and Just Sports Inc., began High Court proceedings against West Ham over the ownership of Carlos Tévez and his proposed transfer to Manchester United. I don't see any other way that this could have played out, frankly. West Ham were forced by the Premier League, after the independent panel's ruling in April, to tear up its contract with MSI and Just Sports for Tévez so he could play the final three matches of the season. They did so, breaching the contract, and the way that the other parties are able to recover their loss -- because they wouldn't have sent Tévez to West Ham without a transfer fee if they didn't feel that they would recoup that value in a later sale -- is through a court proceeding. The Premier League, at some point, is going to have to accept that West Ham did what they were asked, but that didn't terminate the economic interest in Tévez under law. It just left the matter open to a court challenge.
There's been some talk that the arrangements between companies like Joorabchian's could be ruled illegal, but it seems unlikely to me. One, these agreements are common in South America, so that lends some credibility to the idea that these may be found legal under English law. Two, if clubs can own players, why can't private companies? It's one thing for Premier League rules to make the distinction, but I don't understand why the law would, so long as the owner's requirements of his charge do not amount to a form of slavery. If the player still controls his destiny, I don't see how a court could rule that a player who may make as much as £5 million or £6 million a year could be considered to be indentured. I'll issue my standard disclosure: I am not a lawyer, so what do I know about the law?
The thinking is that the High Court won't rule before the transfer window ends on Aug. 31. Another Premier League season, another Tévez transfer goes down to the wire, I guess.
There's been some talk that the arrangements between companies like Joorabchian's could be ruled illegal, but it seems unlikely to me. One, these agreements are common in South America, so that lends some credibility to the idea that these may be found legal under English law. Two, if clubs can own players, why can't private companies? It's one thing for Premier League rules to make the distinction, but I don't understand why the law would, so long as the owner's requirements of his charge do not amount to a form of slavery. If the player still controls his destiny, I don't see how a court could rule that a player who may make as much as £5 million or £6 million a year could be considered to be indentured. I'll issue my standard disclosure: I am not a lawyer, so what do I know about the law?
The thinking is that the High Court won't rule before the transfer window ends on Aug. 31. Another Premier League season, another Tévez transfer goes down to the wire, I guess.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Can this get any weirder?
The latest developments in the Carlos Tévez situation include an arrest warrant issued in Brazil for Kia Joorabchian and conflicting statements from Tévez's people and Manchester United on whether the Argentinian will be in Manchester on Tuesday for a physical. The reports on Joorabchian indicate that the Brazilian authorities have been investigating whether Joorabchian's MSI has been using its ownership of Corinthians -- Tévez's former club in Brazil -- to launder money. Joorabchian denies the charges, which add yet another strange twist to the Tévez story.
The arrest warrant hasn't stopped Joorabchian's organization from claiming that Tévez's transfer is going forward with a physical scheduled for Tuesday. That would be two days after Argentina takes on Brazil in the finals of the Copa América in Venezulea. There's no funny business on behalf of the Samba Kings -- the investigation into Joorabchian has been going for more than two years, ever since MSI took control of Corinthians. Manchester United aren't ready to confirm that just yet.
The High Court will decide Friday whether to give Sheffield United a review of the Tévez decision. A report in the Times indicates that the court will have to determine that there was an error of law -- not judgment -- in the original decision in order to give Sheffield United the go-ahead to file an appeal. It is considered unlikely that the High Court will rule in Sheffield United's favor. Speaking of higher authorities, a Guardian columnist notes that Fifa has a big logjam of legal cases, so if Manchester United and Tévez appeal to Fifa, they may not get a quick resolution. Too bad. We could all use a final word on it.
The arrest warrant hasn't stopped Joorabchian's organization from claiming that Tévez's transfer is going forward with a physical scheduled for Tuesday. That would be two days after Argentina takes on Brazil in the finals of the Copa América in Venezulea. There's no funny business on behalf of the Samba Kings -- the investigation into Joorabchian has been going for more than two years, ever since MSI took control of Corinthians. Manchester United aren't ready to confirm that just yet.
The High Court will decide Friday whether to give Sheffield United a review of the Tévez decision. A report in the Times indicates that the court will have to determine that there was an error of law -- not judgment -- in the original decision in order to give Sheffield United the go-ahead to file an appeal. It is considered unlikely that the High Court will rule in Sheffield United's favor. Speaking of higher authorities, a Guardian columnist notes that Fifa has a big logjam of legal cases, so if Manchester United and Tévez appeal to Fifa, they may not get a quick resolution. Too bad. We could all use a final word on it.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Seeking outside assistance
West Ham, Manchester United and Kia Joorabchian are all lined up on one side against the Premier League over the attempted transfer of Carlos Tévez to Old Trafford. The Premiership are contending that West Ham must not only negotiate the transfer, but also keep most or all of the money from it, because the club canceled its contract with Joorabchian. This Guardian story explains that West Ham claimed to have torn up their entire agreement with Joorabchian. All along, I thought, wrongly perhaps, that West Ham only claimed to be unilaterally ending the right of Joorabchian to force a transfer of Tévez or, in other words, they were saying that they would breach that provision in the contract with Joorabchian should he try to wield control over the player. The club always claimed to hold the registration on Tévez, but not until now have they claimed to "own" him, or at least not that I have seen.
The Guardian reports that the Court of Arbitration for Sport will adjudicate the matter. The Times reports that the Football Association will arbitrate the transfer. The Independent reports that West Ham, Manchester United and Joorabchian have asked the FA to step in, with threats to involve FIFA if the matter isn't resolved. The Premier League, the Times said, is now considered to be partial in the matter, because it is seen as taking its hardline position over the transfer to strengthen its legal position vis-a-vis Sheffield United. The Guardian and the Times both contend that West Ham would be happy to see the transfer pushed through even without much, if any, payment to Upton Park just to have the matter over and done with.
Perhaps the influence of the arbitration court or one of the football governing bodies will help this transfer go through. It's consistent with my understanding of what happened here. Just because the Premiership forced West Ham to breach or tear up their contract with Joorabchian doesn't end his rights. West Ham have to be able to settle with him. Maybe bringing in another party will help that happen.
Also over and done with: The transfer of striker Craig Bellamy from Liverpool. Bellamy, who will turn 28 soon, says he hopes to stabilize his career at West Ham and appreciates the chance to be "a senior player" at a club with ambitions for Europe.
The Guardian reports that the Court of Arbitration for Sport will adjudicate the matter. The Times reports that the Football Association will arbitrate the transfer. The Independent reports that West Ham, Manchester United and Joorabchian have asked the FA to step in, with threats to involve FIFA if the matter isn't resolved. The Premier League, the Times said, is now considered to be partial in the matter, because it is seen as taking its hardline position over the transfer to strengthen its legal position vis-a-vis Sheffield United. The Guardian and the Times both contend that West Ham would be happy to see the transfer pushed through even without much, if any, payment to Upton Park just to have the matter over and done with.
Perhaps the influence of the arbitration court or one of the football governing bodies will help this transfer go through. It's consistent with my understanding of what happened here. Just because the Premiership forced West Ham to breach or tear up their contract with Joorabchian doesn't end his rights. West Ham have to be able to settle with him. Maybe bringing in another party will help that happen.
Also over and done with: The transfer of striker Craig Bellamy from Liverpool. Bellamy, who will turn 28 soon, says he hopes to stabilize his career at West Ham and appreciates the chance to be "a senior player" at a club with ambitions for Europe.
Two in, two out
Yossi Benayoun followed Nigel Reo-Coker out the door, as Liverpool completed their £5 million purchase of the Israeli international captain. (The Telegraph, however, reported that the transfer fee was £4 million.) Those two midfielders have been replaced by West Ham's purchase of Scott Parker from Newcastle and Julien Faubert from Bordeaux in the French top flight.
Benayoun, as I've mentioned before, quickly became my favorite player last season, my first following the club (and football in general). I enjoyed his low-key, always-solid play, with the occasional bit of brilliance. I didn't get to see it till much later, but there was the back-heel pass to set up Bobby Zamora for the winner against Everton in April, for example. I watched one highlight tape of Faubert on YouTube. (I'm glad it's still there. I tried to look up Zamora's goal against Everton, using a link that a reader had left in the comments back then, but when I put in that URL, the page said that "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by FA Premier League." Unfortunate, but not surprising, I guess.) He seems to have great speed and a delicate touch and also seems pretty good at setting up teammates on crosses. I'll watch him with an open mind, even though I'll miss Benayoun.
Benayoun, as I've mentioned before, quickly became my favorite player last season, my first following the club (and football in general). I enjoyed his low-key, always-solid play, with the occasional bit of brilliance. I didn't get to see it till much later, but there was the back-heel pass to set up Bobby Zamora for the winner against Everton in April, for example. I watched one highlight tape of Faubert on YouTube. (I'm glad it's still there. I tried to look up Zamora's goal against Everton, using a link that a reader had left in the comments back then, but when I put in that URL, the page said that "This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by FA Premier League." Unfortunate, but not surprising, I guess.) He seems to have great speed and a delicate touch and also seems pretty good at setting up teammates on crosses. I'll watch him with an open mind, even though I'll miss Benayoun.
Monday, July 9, 2007
The inevitable is no less disappointing
As I was typing this, I saw highlights of Argentina's 4-0 win over Perú in the Copa América, and it made me sad. Carlos Tévez, wearing No. 11 for Argentina, was all over the highlights, even though he didn't score a goal himself. He set up one and he narrowly missed scoring a pair of his own. One was on a diving header; it was amazing that he even got to the ball. The other shot, which hit the crossbar, came after a stop-starting run through the left-center of the Perú defense. Oh, and just for good measure, after a save on a point-blank chance set up by Tévez, Javier Mascherano scored on the rebound.
Of course, this all makes me sad because Tévez's transfer to Manchester United is all but certain, according to Man U manager Sir Alex Ferguson. The Independent, however, is not so sure. The paper reports that the Premier League's insistence that the transfer come through West Ham, which holds Tévez's registration, is holding things up. The BBC reports that the Premier League will insist that West Ham will have to keep "a chunk" of the transfer fee to underline the club's assertion that its agreements with the owners of Tévez's economic rights, Kia Joorabchian and two companies linked to him, were canceled by the club.
The Premier League is being a tad unreasonable here. West Ham breached their agreement with Joorabchian to end their breach of the Premier League rule on third-party influence over a player. That doesn't mean that Joorabchian's rights go away. It just means that West Ham have to find another way to satisfy Joorabchian. And because this is mostly about how much money Joorabchian can earn from selling Tévez, money will do just fine instead of the specific performance of giving Joorabchian the right to sell Tévez when and to where Joorabchian wants. West Ham claim to have the registration to Tévez, but do not claim to own his rights in full the way they do, say, Mark Noble. You would think that the Premier League would be eager to avoid seeing one of its members taken to court by an agent.
Of course, this all makes me sad because Tévez's transfer to Manchester United is all but certain, according to Man U manager Sir Alex Ferguson. The Independent, however, is not so sure. The paper reports that the Premier League's insistence that the transfer come through West Ham, which holds Tévez's registration, is holding things up. The BBC reports that the Premier League will insist that West Ham will have to keep "a chunk" of the transfer fee to underline the club's assertion that its agreements with the owners of Tévez's economic rights, Kia Joorabchian and two companies linked to him, were canceled by the club.
The Premier League is being a tad unreasonable here. West Ham breached their agreement with Joorabchian to end their breach of the Premier League rule on third-party influence over a player. That doesn't mean that Joorabchian's rights go away. It just means that West Ham have to find another way to satisfy Joorabchian. And because this is mostly about how much money Joorabchian can earn from selling Tévez, money will do just fine instead of the specific performance of giving Joorabchian the right to sell Tévez when and to where Joorabchian wants. West Ham claim to have the registration to Tévez, but do not claim to own his rights in full the way they do, say, Mark Noble. You would think that the Premier League would be eager to avoid seeing one of its members taken to court by an agent.
Behind the curve
OK, I had no intention of not writing here for more than two weeks. But after watching the Gold Cup semifinals, I had a short weekend before leaving on a business trip on that Sunday, during the finals (U.S. 2, México1). That trip took me on three flights and an unplanned, eight-hour drive from Nashville to Chicago (flight No. 4 was canceled). In the interval, I received my first-ever West Ham shirt as a birthday present (No. 36 for me -- the birthday, not the number; it's still blank). TMG asked her sister to buy the shirt for me in London and bring it over. It's the jobserve.com version of the home shirt, short-sleeved, and it's magnificent. I also received a West Ham cap. Of course, with classic Hammers luck, I practically ruined the shirt an hour after I put it on. I was grilling out with some friends when I opened a mustard bottle, which promptly spat up some of its contents across the shirt. At least the mustard came out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)