Source: Telegraph
West Ham face new Carlos Tevez probe
If they are found to have misled the League they could be charged with a breach of rule B13, which requires clubs to act in good faith, and may face a new round of disciplinary hearings and the prospect of further fines or points deductions. [LNB]West Ham were fined £5.5 million in April 2007 for breaching league rules concerning third-party agreements in their signing of Tevez, who joined the previous summer despite his economic rights being owned by Kia Joorabchian. [LNB]The new inquiry will focus on West Ham's conduct in the immediate aftermath of the original Premier League ruling, and their decision to unilaterally terminate their contract with Joorabchian in order to allow Tevez to play in the final three games of the season. [LNB]The central issue will be whether West Ham chief executive Scott Duxbury misled the league when he claimed that the club's contract with Joorabchian had been terminated. After being cleared to play, the Argentine was instrumental in West Ham avoiding relegation, scoring the only goal in the final match of the season at Manchester United to ensure survival. [LNB]Duxbury, former West Ham chairman Eggert Magnusson, Tevez's representative Joorabchian, his solicitor Graham Shear and Sheffield United chairman Kevin McCabe, will all be asked to give evidence in writing and in person to the new inquiry. [LNB]The joint investigation has been prompted by the findings of Lord Griffiths, who last autumn chaired an FA arbitration panel hearing into a £30 million compensation claim from Sheffield United, relegated in West Ham's stead. [LNB]Griffiths ruled in Sheffield United's favour and found that Duxbury had misled the League in relation to the termination of the third party agreement. In the wake of the original ruling Duxbury and West Ham insisted that they terminated the agreement with Joorabchian. That view was contested by Shear, who said in evidence to Griffiths that Duxbury, in a series of "oral cuddles", assured him that the third-party agreement remained in place. [LNB]Asked if Duxbury assured Shear that they would not depart from the terms of their deal with Joorabchian, Shear said: "Broadly, yes. West Ham were desperate to ensure that Mr Tevez played for the club in the critical last few games of the season. Whilst having no choice but to adhere to the Premier League's requirements, West Ham wanted to do everything possible to attempt to placate the rights owners." [LNB]Griffith said in his ruling: "If the Premier League had known what Mr Duxbury for West Ham was saying to Mr Joorabchian's solicitor following the commission decision, we are confident that the Premier League would have suspended Mr Tevez's registration as a West Ham player." [LNB]West Ham said last night that they had nothing to hide, but the new investigation is a further distraction in a troubled season. With owner Bjorgolfur Gudmundsson under financial pressure the new uncertainty will not help his search for a buyer for the club. [LNB]The decision to re-open a case that has been deeply uncomfortable for the Premier League comes as a surprise. Despite acute pressure from Sheffield United and Premier League clubs including Wigan, the League has long insisted that the matter was closed and that West Ham had satisfied the legal requirements of the Premier League rulebook. [LNB]League sources say the decision to look again at the issue was taken on the advice of legal officials at the Premier League and the FA, but there is scepticism as to whether the inquiry will reach a definitive conclusion. The League also remain convinced that West Ham met the legal requirements of the rulebook by terminating the third-party deal. [LNB]That prompted Joorabchian to sue, and West Ham eventually settled out-of-court for £2 million, a move that satisfied the League that the club's assurances were genuine. [LNB]Any ruling that undermined that view would be catastrophic for confidence in the leadership of the League. [LNB]
