Where will Tevez end up? Man Utd, Man City…or Chelsea?
By dixon9
June 19 2009
For some days now the media have been claiming that three clubs have been vying for the signature of Kiavash "Kia" Joorabchian owned forward Carlos Tevez. All three clubs seem to have a reasonable chance of being successful in these supposed bids – but which one would Tevez plump for?
Tevez has already revealed that he has been upset with his current parking-place club, Manchester United over their initial unwillingness to make an offer for him – this situation now seems to have changed with the substantial cash-influx from the Ronaldo deal.
The media claim that the Red Devils have agreed a £26million fee with Joorabchian although they would have to match his wages with those of Rio Ferdinand and Dimitar Berbatov - £110,000 a week. If Man Utd are determined to keep the Argentinean then they certainly have the money to do so.
If not, then Manchester City would feel very confident; they would have no problems with the financial aspects of the deal and just as importantly for Tevez, he would not have to move his family. The sporting success parameter of a move to City would however (at least in his first season) be a disadvantage – no Champions League football – and this is where Chelsea hold that card.
Ancelotti has reportedly phoned Tevez personally to persuade Tevez to move to the Bridge and this personal touch made a big impression on the player. We have the money and we have Champions League football – the only possible obstacle is whether Tevez would be prepared to move his family to Surrey/London – we know he wants to stay in England but we don’t know if he means specifically Manchester.
It was always assumed by many Chelsea fans that Abramovich would never deal with MSI (Media Sports Investments) who used to own Tevez because one of their primary shareholders was business enemy Boris Berezovsky (other rumours were that Abramovich actually had a 15% share of the investment group and that he didn’t want to take any chance with possible ethical issues with the Premier League). Since 2006, however, Joorabchian has resigned from MSI yet still holds Tevez – and I don’t imagine Ancelotti would move on Tevez without our owner’s go-ahead.
Some Chelsea fans expressed surprise over our supposed interest in Tevez. Maybe Ancelotti sees him playing in the “2” behind the main forward in his Christmas tree formation?
Whilst I wasn’t THAT enthusiastic about a move for Tevez I can see the exciting possibilities in that sense.The easiest choice for Tevez would obviously be Manchester United – should they decide that his wage demands are too high then I would put us as favourites to get him.
If you do not already have an account Click here to Register.
the only way he will end up at city is if utd fail to make him top earner or he feels that uprooting his family from the north to the south will be to much upheavel for them
but i would say that utd still hold all the cards city and chelsea will just have to wait and see
"It is born out of hypocrisy and fundamental insecurity. There have been two kids on the block for the past 12 years. Suddenly, there is a third and that one is threatening to be more successful than the others and they don’t like it." P Kenyon.
No champions League this season... no big deal just bank the cash with a wife and young family happily settled in Manchester.
Keep talking it up you guy's, Kia Joorabchian has a close working relationship with MCFC already, this deal was agreed weeks ago Chelsea are @#$%& in the wind tell your manager to save on his telephone bills you are too late.
"It is born out of hypocrisy and fundamental insecurity. There have been two kids on the block for the past 12 years. Suddenly, there is a third and that one is threatening to be more successful than the others and they don’t like it." P Kenyon.
So City....or us.
"It is born out of hypocrisy and fundamental insecurity. There have been two kids on the block for the past 12 years. Suddenly, there is a third and that one is threatening to be more successful than the others and they don’t like it." P Kenyon.
LINK
"It is born out of hypocrisy and fundamental insecurity. There have been two kids on the block for the past 12 years. Suddenly, there is a third and that one is threatening to be more successful than the others and they don’t like it." P Kenyon.