Former Premier League striker Peter Odemwingie has reignited controversy surrounding his infamous 2013 transfer saga, warning that he could take legal action against Sky Sports, West Bromwich Albion and Queens Park Rangers over the way the incident has been portrayed for more than a decade.

Odemwingie became one of the most recognisable figures in Premier League transfer deadline day history after arriving outside QPR’s Loftus Road stadium in the final hours of the January 2013 transfer window. The Nigerian forward was convinced that he was about to complete a move to the London club and was famously approached by reporters while sitting in his car.

However, the transfer ultimately collapsed because QPR and West Brom were unable to reach an agreement over the terms of the deal. With the 11pm deadline rapidly approaching, negotiations broke down and Odemwingie was forced to return to West Brom, despite having already travelled to London believing that the transfer was effectively completed.

The extraordinary sequence of events quickly became one of the defining moments of modern transfer deadline day coverage. Images and footage of Odemwingie outside Loftus Road were repeatedly broadcast, while his unusual appearance in front of television cameras became a familiar part of transfer-window history.

The episode also had serious consequences for the striker. West Brom took disciplinary action against him, while then-chairman Jeremy Peace publicly criticised his behaviour and described it as “wholly unprofessional”. The incident followed Odemwingie throughout his career and has continued to be referenced whenever dramatic or unexpected deadline-day stories emerge.

More than 13 years later, Odemwingie has now challenged the way the story has been presented by the media. Footage from his infamous interview was shown again by Sky Sports News in the build-up to another transfer deadline, prompting the former striker to respond on social media.

Odemwingie accused the broadcaster of repeatedly focusing on the most sensational part of the story while failing to provide what he considers to be the complete version of events. He also questioned the motives behind continuing to replay the footage so many years after the original incident.

In a video posted on Instagram, the former Nigeria international said he believed the story had been repeatedly exploited for entertainment value. He argued that there had been little interest in understanding what actually happened behind the scenes during the chaotic negotiations.

Odemwingie also raised questions about the involvement of several individuals connected with the transfer. In particular, he criticised Sky Sports reporter Dharmesh Sheth and former Sky Sports presenter Natalie Sawyer, both of whom were involved in coverage of the saga.

He claimed that representatives from both West Brom and QPR, as well as Sky Sports and his own representatives, should answer questions about the circumstances surrounding the failed move. Odemwingie also revealed that he planned to consult a lawyer, suggesting that he was considering formal legal action.

One of the issues that particularly frustrated him was the continued use of footage from the night. Odemwingie questioned why Sky Sports had continued to revisit the incident repeatedly and suggested that the broadcaster had been more interested in the entertainment value of the story than in explaining the full circumstances.

According to Odemwingie, the negotiations themselves were considerably more complicated than the public narrative suggested. He claimed that a potential deal involving QPR midfielder Junior Hoilett had contributed to the uncertainty, with the two clubs spending much of the day discussing possible arrangements.

Odemwingie has also disputed the idea that he simply turned up at QPR without any understanding of what was happening. He claims that his agent, Barry McIntosh, had been working to advance the transfer and was communicating with people connected to Sky Sports reporter Dharmesh Sheth.

The former striker said he had initially been approached about appearing in front of a Sky Sports camera while travelling towards London. However, he rejected the suggestion because he did not want to deliberately create a public spectacle before the transfer had been officially completed.

Odemwingie maintains that he had no intention of staging the famous scene outside Loftus Road. Instead, he claims that he was acting on information provided to him by his agent.

According to his account, Odemwingie and McIntosh spent roughly two hours waiting for further information after attempts to contact West Brom proved unsuccessful. Eventually, Odemwingie followed his agent’s vehicle towards QPR.

The striker said that McIntosh told him the transfer had effectively been sorted, which gave him reason to believe that he was travelling to the club to complete the final formalities.

Odemwingie has explained that he did not even know exactly where they were heading. He had never previously travelled to QPR by car and was simply following his agent’s vehicle. When the car eventually stopped, television cameras appeared and the now-famous footage was recorded.

From Odemwingie’s perspective, the situation was made worse by what he believes was a lack of clarity from West Brom. He claims that the club subsequently indicated that the transfer was dependent on Hoilett moving in the opposite direction as part of the arrangement.

Odemwingie strongly disputes that such a condition had been communicated to him beforehand. He believes the sudden change in circumstances contributed significantly to the collapse of the deal.

The former striker also referred to the involvement of then-West Brom technical director Dan Ashworth and other senior figures during the negotiations. He argued that the full chain of events has never been properly explained to the public.

His criticism has not been limited to Sky Sports. Odemwingie has also taken aim at QPR after the club eventually auctioned the shirt that had reportedly been prepared for him ahead of his expected arrival in January 2013.

The unused shirt remained at the club for more than a decade before being put up for auction in December last year. Odemwingie appeared unhappy that an item connected to such a controversial episode could later be used in this way.

He has also renewed his criticism of Natalie Sawyer, who was one of the prominent Sky Sports presenters covering the story at the time. Sawyer famously questioned whether QPR would really want to sign a player after what had happened during the deadline-day drama.

Odemwingie recently shared footage of Sawyer discussing the incident and appeared to suggest that the circumstances surrounding the story were now beginning to change.

In a cryptic social-media post accompanying the video, he indicated that the balance of the situation had shifted and suggested that those involved should be prepared to answer questions.

His comments represent a dramatic new chapter in a transfer saga that had seemingly become part of Premier League folklore. For years, Odemwingie was largely remembered for the image of him sitting in his car outside QPR, apparently waiting for a transfer that never happened.

However, the former striker now wants supporters to view the episode from his perspective. He insists that the reality was more complicated than the humorous and chaotic version repeatedly shown on television.

Whether Odemwingie ultimately proceeds with legal action remains to be seen. His decision to consult a lawyer, however, indicates that he is serious about challenging the way the incident has been handled.

More than a decade after the failed transfer, the 2013 deadline-day saga therefore remains controversial. What began as a collapsed Premier League move has evolved into a dispute over media coverage, the responsibilities of agents and clubs, and the accuracy of the story that has been repeatedly told to football fans.

For Odemwingie, the issue is no longer simply about a transfer that fell through. He appears determined to establish his own version of events and ensure that the circumstances behind one of football’s most memorable deadline-day moments are examined more closely.