Inter Milan: Why Sir Alex Ferguson Thinks Carlos Tevez Isn't Worth Inter's Time
It was a surprise two years ago for Manchester United fans to hear the club announce that they wouldn't be signing Carlos Tevez on a permanent deal following his successful two-year loan spell at the club.
Reports at the time claimed that the reason behind Manchester United's default in the process was because Sir Alex Ferguson believed Tevez to be worth considerably less than the asking price at the time, thought to be £32 million.
Those reports weren't far off the mark. In fact, according to Sir Alex, the reason the club opted out from signing Tevez was because the Argentine striker had intended to retire in 2013. Speaking in an interview, he said:
"He [Tevez] told us he was only going to play for four more years. If we had signed him on a five-year contract knowing that he was going to quit in four, there would have been no re-sale value for us."
This certainly wasn't the picture painted for us by Tevez who, at the time, said:
"From the first moment I came here I would have loved to sign a long-term contract. Last year [2007/2008] was a very happy season and it would be wonderful if the chairman put a long-term contract in front of me. If he did that I would sign it without a doubt."
Well, perhaps Tevez could understand that making an offer to him was always going to go against all sense and sensibility?
Is Carlos Tevez worth the hassle?
And in Sir Alex Ferguson's opinion, this is still the case in Manchester City's ongoing struggle with the player. Sir Alex said, "I’m not sure Inter would pay £45 million, especially after he’s said he wants to go back to Argentina to see his kids. I can see him staying at City."
Okay, hold on just a minute!
I don''t think there is any doubt that Carlos Tevez is a world-class talent and to stretch to say that—on his day—he is probably the best striker in the world is not an overstatement.
I'm not so sure.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?