retired_kara515

yeh in my liverpool game, if you went to look at the 'transfers' bit in finance then it would show that a third party will recieve 80% of any transfer that might go throguh with mascherano.

retired_nivea

Yeah SI have done the same with tevez, it just says he's a man utd player, when utd still have a lot to pay for him. Yet another SI shortcut </BLOCKQUOTE>

What a negative outlook you have !

bearing in mind the complexity of these two deals and the uniqueness of them (not even the premiership knew what was going on and I dont think West Ham really understood it) how on earth do you think SI should have implemented it ?

As time goes on and these types of deals become standard, if they ever do, then SI will no doubt built them in.

Just to jump on their case and accuse them of taking "shortcuts" is absurd.

ExeRepairEric

If he was set as on loan from west ham with a future fee then the fee would be an unfair advantage to west ham.

As long as SI have reduced Liverpools budget by 17mil or so then its the fairest way to do it in the game world.

retired_rkp278

Tevez and Mascherano are on loan from MSI, but I understand that it is a bit hard for SI to implenment in the game.

After all, if someone buys the players outright, who does the money go to?

retired_mgmgfns3

This was discussed extensively before the release of FM08, and the consesus from this forum was that MSI could be added as a team without ability to play games. 3rd party ownership is rife in South America so is an important part of football management, even if in europe we haven't seen too much of it yet, and consequently should really have been included in FM in some way.

retired_junvan

Really is it that big of deal? Some people just never find enough to complain about......

retired_mgmgfns3

it is a big deal. just as co-ownership is widespread in Italy, 3rd party ownership is a major part of the football system in south america. Just becuase it is uncommon in Europe doesn't mean it shouldn't be included in FM.
As I've already said, it would have been easy to at least include details of Tevez and Mascherano's deals by having MSI as an inactive team.
FIFA have said they are going to ban third party ownership, but this would have big consequences for the finances of south american clubs as third party ownership gives teams the financial freedom needed to search for and acquire exciting new talent.

retired_junvan

They do already include co-ownership features in Italy.

The 3rd party ownership issue is currently applicable to 2 players (to the best of my knowledge) and it is probably not on the top of SI's to-do list, considering it does not effect many players.

If they made MSI a team we would people on here complaining that they aren't a team. :-)

retired_mgmgfns3

retired_junvan

True. Hopefully what will happen is that FIFA will make 3rd party ownership illegal (as it is the closest form of slavery I have seen in quite some time) and SI Games won't have to worry about it.