United ask FIFA to resolve Tevez move

Manchester United are to take the Carlos Tevez dispute to FIFA, chief executive David Gill announced today.

The club’s plans to give the Argentina striker a medical this morning were blocked by West Ham and United are taking the issue to FIFA’s dispute resolution chamber.

Gill said the case would be rushed through by FIFA so that it could be dealt with as soon as possible.

He also expressed his confidence that Tevez would eventually become a United player.

Talks between United lawyer Maurice Watkins and West Ham chairman Eggert Magnusson at the Premier League's offices in London yesterday ended in stalemate with no agreement reached over the 23-year-old.

Tevez flew into Manchester yesterday with the intention of undergoing a medical this morning but West Ham refused to grant permission.

A West Ham spokesman said: “Meetings have taken place between the two clubs but no agreement has been reached in relation to Carlos Tevez.”

One club cannot give a player a medical unless his current club agrees and West Ham will not give formal permission for a medical until they have been made an offer and accepted it.

West Ham remain adamant that they hold Tevez’s registration, that he is contracted to them for another three years and that they have unilaterally terminated all third-party agreements with Tevez’s representative Kia Joorabchian.

Joorabchian maintains that his company Media Sports Investments (MSI) own the economic rights to the player, and that they have already agreed personal terms with Manchester United.

United are understood to have agreed an initial loan deal for Tevez with a view to a permanent transfer, a similar deal to that which took Javier Mascherano from West Ham to Liverpool in January.

That hit a stumbling block however because in January, West Ham cancelled Mascherano’s registration. The Premier League are not allowing the club to do the same procedure with Tevez on the basis that such a move would indicate the original agreements with Joorabchian were still binding despite assurances to the contrary.