Tuesday, 24 July 2007

Passing The Buck

Fifa have recommended that the Carlos Tevez dispute should go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS). The world football's governing body came to their decision following a high level meeting with FA and Premier League officials in Zurich yesterday, and believe their decision is in the best interests of all concerned. Fifa spokesman Andreas Herren said: "The recommendation from Fifa to the FA and the Premier League is to go to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Under the circumstances it was felt it would be in the best interest of all parties to take this course. It looks like being the fastest way of resolving this matter. It is not a refusal by Fifa to get involved, quite the contrary. It is a recommendation by Fifa to opt for this way."

The legal team considered the case overnight before recommending CAS rule on the matter and Fifa's senior legal counsel has already been in touch with the Football Association and the Premier League to advise them of their decision. The recommendation to go to CAS applies to West Ham and Carlos Tevez but not Manchester United, who are not regarded as directly involved in the dispute. The Premier League welcomed the decision. A spokesman said: "The Premier League and FA are grateful to Fifa for considering this issue. We are supportive of the recommendation that if all parties are in agreement the matter should be referred to the Court of Arbitration for Sport."

West Ham were eager for Fifa to get involved in what has become a stalemate in recent weeks, with the club refusing to sanction Tevez's proposed move to Manchester United. Joorabchian claims he owns the player's economic rights and is therefore entitled to his transfer fee. The Premier League, however, says the Hammers own the player and therefore must receive any such fee. Manchester United chief executive David Gill had said last week that he was confident Fifa would reach a decision on the issue. "What you find in these situations, though, is that Fifa and the necessary bodies try to make sure that the player can play, whether it's for Manchester United or for West Ham."

The Telegraph believe this latest turn of events represents a passing of the buck by Fifa, who have done little to address the ongoing wrangle over the player. Despite an official statement that insisted the decision was deemed to be the best approach, in the interest of all parties and the fastest way to solve this impasse, CAS is yet to even comment on whether it will deign to hear the case. That decision, when it comes, could become an irrelevance as any proposed arbitration hearing would require the agreement of both parties. While West Ham have already indicated they are happy for CAS to rule on the issue, BBC Sport is claiming that Kia Joorabchian is now considering taking the matter straight to the High Court. They suggest his motivation behind this is a desire to push through a deal before the transfer window closes on 31 August, and has absolutely nothing to do with the fact, he has already recently suffered a damaging loss in a separate high-profile case within the confines of CAS.


Baz said...

Perhaps that childrens party game we all love should be renamed "pass the Tevez".
FIFa seems to have had a serious loss of backbone on the issue.
This is going to end up in the high court whatever the CAS decision, its too important for either KJ or the PL/WHU to lose.
This very boring soap opera will be running right up until the new year window or until KJ ends up in a Brazillian Prison..

Lucas said...

Yes, it seems West Ham is gulity and FIFA are just passing the buck. The premier League seems to have bitten more they can chew!

Rohan said...

What really should come to light is if West Ham own Carlos Tevez and has still three years to run on his contract with them then what was the fee they paid to MSI to sign him off of them? Or are they thinking the fined sum of £5.5 million takes care of that issue. And what is this joke about West Ham tearing up their previous contract with MSI? Is this a child's play and since when was it allowed to simply tear up a contract unilaterally? The final verdict should come from the right authorities but West Ham are the biggest culprits in this then followed by FA. Waste of everyone's time.

Cliff said...

Surely the money must be paid to West Ham.
If Man U pay the fee to Joorabchian, this shows that the third party agreement had not been rescinded, whether unilaterally by West Ham or by mutual agreement.
This is such a mess that it is becoming absurd. If a player or manager criicises a referee he is charged with bringing the game into disrepute,.
That charge should be stricken from the list because nothing can compare to this fiasco and a disrepute charge or hearing is not even being contemplated.


Copyright 2007 ID Media Inc, All Right Reserved. Crafted by Nurudin Jauhari