Carlos Tevez was widely tipped to be remembered for his silky skills when he burst onto the scene in his native Argentina. Sadly for the player, unless he achieves the greatness of Pele or Maradona or their ilk, the abiding memory of his time in England will be that of his transfer to West Ham. The ins and outs are well documented within the media yet they leave several questions unanswered, ones that have far-reaching consequences for the English game.

Third party ownership of players is a common practice on the distant shores of South America yet FIFA and their constituent members from UEFA have developed a distaste for this practice. Unquestionably, there are uncomfortable aspects of such deals but are the authorities overstating the case. Put simply, they believe that undue influence can be put on the playing side of a club if third parties own the economic rights to a player, presumably a key one at that. However, unless there are two sets of circumstances applicable in any case, it is hard to follow their logic.

Fundamentally, it is in the interests of such parties to have their asset on the pitch in every match. The concern is that they dictate to a club / manager that he plays whatever happens, whatever his form or fitness. This cannot be right for their economic rights suffer if his form dips or he plays when injured. Anything that is detrimental to the player’s game is detrimental to their financial interests. In those circumstances, it is hard to see where the interests of a club and the third party conflict as they have, ultimately, the same outcome.

Where the conflict arises most sharply is if the third party has a vested interest in another club but the question that has never been answered is why they would not put or keep the player at that club. This follows in the Tevez case, a club is owned by MIA – Corinthians – and Tevez plays for them. He moved to West Ham and Kia Joorbachian fronts a consortium that tries to buy the club, willingly up for sale at the time. In itself, a logical step albeit one that sits uncomfortably yet where is the difference between ADUG and MIA? Only in the ownership of Tevez, something that would undoubtedly be considered by ADUG if the opportunity to own Robinho, for example, came to bear.

The second instance of discomfort would be any link between the player’s owners and any betting syndicate. This is perhaps the more serious question, one where third party ownership may be subject to extreme concern but once more is it overstated? There are huge monies wagered on football in any country but rarely are there attempts to influence the top sides, more often the cases which are found come as a result of matches in the lower leagues. That is not to dismiss them for those circumstances still call into question the integrity of the sport, even one as obviously corrupt as football.

More immediately, the problem for English football is the governance of the game. As the leading income generator, the Premier League believe their interests matter more than anyone else’s, an arrogant, bullying position to hold and one that will ultimately lead to the downfall of the individuals who bring it to bear. Ridiculed for the ‘Thirty-nine Game Plan’, the Premier League attempt to cross swords with the Football Association at any given corner. Whilst the majority of the points upon which they argue are seemingly trivial, the governance of English football cannot be considered so.

The Premier League’s handling of the disciplinary aspect of the Tevez affair leaves much to be desired. Faced with a decision that would require action impacting the league positions of two teams, independent inquiries ruled to hand out a monetary punishment. This is fundamentally wrong. Whilst the finanicial gain for remaining in the top flight is huge, to allow a transgressor to escape points deductions for infringements committed that allow sporting gain is wrong, ethically and practically. There is little doubt that the influence Tevez had upon the outcome of the season in question is huge; West Ham survived by three points. Remove the points gained by the Argentinean’s goals and they would have been relegated. That is natural justice, not the convoluted punishment handed out by the Premier League.

Moreover, in making the judgement that the Inquiries came to, the natural progression should have been to the Football Association and then the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), rather than permitting Sheffield United to take their action to the High Court, a motion doomed to fail before it had even been heard. That the Yorkshire club chose to opt for legal rather than ’sporting’ outcomes serves to highlight their folly. The expected judgement is that they will win substantial damages. Had they progressed through sporting channels, perhaps their status as a Premier League club would have been preserved and who knows where they might have progressed to in their second season in the top flight.

Whatever the arguments put forward, the Premier Leaguer is perceived to have closed ranks around West Ham. At the end of the original appeal, Sheffield United should have been directed to the Football Association for a second appeal. This did not happen for were that to have been successful, the Premier League’s control over their members would have been usurped; the ruling body would have been seen to be all-powerful, something that the greed of the top flight clubs will not permit to happen.

English football regularly finds itself at crossroads over the game’s future. This is not quite one of them but merely the taster for what is inevitably to come. The Premier League and Football Association are not comfortable bedfellows; both seek to control the sport in this country and neither will back down willingly unless their long-term gameplan is served. In the not-to-distant future, UEFA and FIFA are going to be faced with a stark choice; back the FA or Premier League. Logic dictates that their constituent member be the beneficiary but money talks and that backing cannot be depended upon. If the battle is won by the Premier League, God help football for those in charge will not have done.