snakehips 0 Posted July 6, 2007 Author Share Posted July 6, 2007 Eggert 'Schmeegle' Magnessun (sp) has just issued a statement that Tevez is a West Ham player and has no agreement to go anywhere. He (magnesun) expects Tevez to return to training at W.Ham !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 "Carlos Tevez is a registered West Ham United player, contracted to the Club until June 2010. "There is no agreement with West Ham United for Carlos Tevez to leave the Club and we expect him to return in time for next season's preparations. "No decision on his future can be reached without the agreement of West Ham United." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Jorabchian says: "we confirm that Tevez has been in negotiations with other clubs with West Ham's permission, and personal terms have been agreed with Manchester United" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieshandy 0 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 I'm more confused than that time someone wanted to buy a belt, and although I didn't own a belt, I managed to sell a belt, I didn't hold the rights to the belt but still got money for the belt. The thing is, who's going to end up with their trousers round their ankles this time? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Patrokles Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Seems he was never sold to West Ham, still belongs to MSI, and has now moved on a two year loan to Man Utd. SSN as we speak (alledgedly) This whole Tevez thing stinks to high heaven.It makes Westhams' win over Man U at the end of last season looks very dodgy,doesn't it ? I can't see an entire team throwing a game though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 I'm more confused than that time someone wanted to buy a belt, and although I didn't own a belt, I managed to sell a belt, I didn't hold the rights to the belt but still got money for the belt. The thing is, who's going to end up with their trousers round their ankles this time? Even though you didn't see any of the transfer fee of the belt, did you or did you not retain the image rights to any merchandise of the belt and a percentage of any future transfer fee ?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieshandy 0 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Well it's a complex issue, although I did ask the buyer's missus to offer to suck the sellers cock. Although on that occasion she didn't play dice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Well it's a complex issue, although I did ask the buyer's missus to offer to suck the sellers cock. Although on that occasion she didn't play dice. Thanks for negotiating on my behalf, strictly speaking I was the seller, you were just the agent, didn't you think to offer a bung ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieshandy 0 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Well it's a complex issue, although I did ask the buyer's missus to offer to suck the sellers cock. Although on that occasion she didn't play dice. Thanks for negotiating on my behalf, strictly speaking I was the seller, you were just the agent, didn't you think to offer a bung ? Well aware that you were the seller. I did offer a bong, but I thought the deal went through alright without the need for such underhand tactics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Well it's a complex issue, although I did ask the buyer's missus to offer to suck the sellers cock. Although on that occasion she didn't play dice. Thanks for negotiating on my behalf, strictly speaking I was the seller, you were just the agent, didn't you think to offer a bung ? Well aware that you were the seller. I did offer a bong, but I thought the deal went through alright without the need for such underhand tactics. you're just too honest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duckerDavies 0 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Gonna be shearer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieshandy 0 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Bring two belts this summer and I'll make sure you get a wad of cash, some coke, and a big breasted hooker for one of them, so you may hopefully be able to keep you kegs in check. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Carr's Gloves 3194 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 I'm more confused than that time someone wanted to buy a belt, and although I didn't own a belt, I managed to sell a belt, I didn't hold the rights to the belt but still got money for the belt. The thing is, who's going to end up with their trousers round their ankles this time? Sheffield Utd. This pisses all over the premier leagues argument that it was all sorted out. Blatant lying hoping Tevez would stay at WHU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jimbo 133 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Bring two belts this summer and I'll make sure you get a wad of cash, some coke, and a big breasted hooker for one of them, so you may hopefully be able to keep you kegs in check. Will do, you think belts are still the best form of currency ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieshandy 0 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Will do, you think belts are still the best form of currency ? I should say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isegrim 8870 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Will do, you think belts are still the best form of currency ? I should say so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geordieshandy 0 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 Will do, you think belts are still the best form of currency ? I should say so. Just head to the Land of Leather before coming out and you'll be reet. But then you know the score by now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dogmatix 0 Posted July 6, 2007 Share Posted July 6, 2007 (edited) Seems he was never sold to West Ham, still belongs to MSI, and has now moved on a two year loan to Man Utd. SSN as we speak (alledgedly) This whole Tevez thing stinks to high heaven.It makes Westhams' win over Man U at the end of last season looks very dodgy,doesn't it ? I can't see an entire team throwing a game though. Well thats not what I said,I said it makes it look dodgy. But it's not beyond the bounds of possibilty to imagine one manager saying 'We arn't going to get anything extra for three points today lads, the league is ours,so no need to bust a gut.Go out enjoy and bask in the glory' While the other manager says ' let us win today,cos if we lose it's going to cost us the thick end of 50 odd million quid.If you do we'll let you sign anyone of 'our' players,please,please,please. All hypothetical of course Edited July 6, 2007 by Dogmatix Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaser 1054 Posted July 8, 2007 Share Posted July 8, 2007 If WHU were fined for the way in which the player was transferred, then surely if WHU dont own Tevez then he can never be sold to anyone under the current way that his registration is handled. Otherwise, every club who "loans" him from MSI will also be committing the same offence. How come the Mascherano transfer wasnt similarly scrutinised? Shouldnt Liverpool be also guilty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4216 Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 If WHU were fined for the way in which the player was transferred, then surely if WHU dont own Tevez then he can never be sold to anyone under the current way that his registration is handled. Otherwise, every club who "loans" him from MSI will also be committing the same offence. How come the Mascherano transfer wasnt similarly scrutinised? Shouldnt Liverpool be also guilty? Possibly because the FA approved it after looking at the 3 clubs in one season rule and approved it, don't want to draw even more negative attention to themselves by saying "oh actually, that transfer we approved was illegal so we're fining you for it" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duckerDavies 0 Posted July 10, 2007 Share Posted July 10, 2007 Well done Jamie Spot on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now