WHO Poll

LeroysBoots 7:36 Sun Apr 14
85 million !?!

Lol, if we get that I'd piss myself

Bloke was fucking terrible today, showboating twat

Replies - Newest Posts First (Show In Chronological Order)

fraser 2:06 Wed Jun 5
Re: Paqueta
Ludo if we do sign all of those Paqueta will still be one of the first on the team sheet

Mike Oxsaw 1:29 Wed Jun 5
Re: Paqueta
I must confess that this all seems to be driven by an undercurrent of "The PL has a brand, the CL has a brand, the FA has a brand. Our sponsors pay (good money) to be assossiated long-term with that established brand and will not tollorate changes or challenges to the format of that brand".

Leicester learned the hard way. Ourselves, Brighton and Newcastle are being warned off. Both barrels are trained on Villa for the next 5 years for pissing on the brand's fireworks; even our future monarch's support will mean nothing.

England, despite providing the majority of the elements - the golden egg-laying geese - of that brand will have little or no say in how things develop.

Hammer and Pickle 11:29 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
Takashi Miike 3:45 Tue Jun 4

But in all seriousness, the timing of the charges announcement indicates a message relating to the club’s aspirations had been sent.

Wils 8:56 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
"Are these new details?... apparently 60 people placed bets of between £7 and £400 and winnings totalled £100,000."

The only thing slightly damning for Paq is that the bets were placed on a island where his mates are from. To be fair you don't need to know Paq as well as his mates would have done to think betting on him getting a yellow is a reasonable bet. The numbers involved hardly look to be worth his while.

Looks a weak case to me. Unless their are more details we don't know. Like text messages etc.

ludo21 6:20 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
BIG IF, but if we get the players in that we are currently being linked with then I don't see how Paqueta gets in the starting line up anyway.

Aleix Garcia is a better CDM playing alongside Alvarez.

Jota Silva would be far better suited to the LW position.

Kudus as a 10.

Same would obviously apply to JWP (and Soucek). Poor old Paq would spend his last few months on the bench.

Jasnik 6:01 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
Hammer and Pickle 12:07 Tue Jun 4

Yeah and there is no similar thing like this happening ever.. oh yeah the Post Office that went well didn't it .

Fauxstralian 5:56 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
Fine him half a million and get him to do a JOKEY ad for Paddy Power taking the piss out of himself with any fee going to charity.
Move on

factory seconds 5:35 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
i'm choosing to put aside any rational deduction and rally the horses.

the dream is that he swerves a conviction because it can't be proven, but becomes a toxic asset to any possible buyers and as a result shows undying loyalty to the club that stuck by him, becomes pivotal in our league winning form and every cunt outside of WHU pisses and moans about having a bloke who fiddled our sponser out of 100 bags leading the way.

ludo21 4:48 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
Are these new details?... apparently 60 people placed bets of between £7 and £400 and winnings totalled £100,000.

He could have just shared a weeks wages out!

The FA want to ban him for life... not going to end well is it.

Hammer and Pickle 4:38 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
This is an example of the FA being woke?

Blimey! What is woke?

Takashi Miike 3:45 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
It was the timing of the charges announcement that made me suspicious. Why did the useless cunts have to do it the day out new manager was announced? All seems a bit personal to me, and for what he's alleged to have done, pretty much speculative bollocks. But what do you expect from such a fucking woke, corrupt, tinpot fucking organisation

Stevethehammer 3:17 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
It wouldn't surprise me if this rumbles on for a while.
The FA can't deal with two things at once and they are desperately trying to sweep the 115 charges on Man city under the carpet. This is the perfect storm to do that as like others have said, this is probably the tip of the iceberg and will now take up all their resource.

ludo21 3:15 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
I fully expect Paqueta to be found guilty if only for the reason that surely the FA must have evidence of collusion between him and those placing the bets otherwise I don't see how it would have progressed this far.

What I don't understand though is why it is seen as the far more damaging charge of match fixing. I can't see how his actions could influence the outcome of matches... had he been sent off I can see the argument but that didn't happen?

Fauxstralian 3:01 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
Given this has dragged on for almost a year with no resolution the club should be suing the FA for the £85m transfer fee with Paqueta suing them for the Man City contract they have jeopardised

Ron Eff 2:46 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
I looked back at the Grobelaar case, and although a good number of years ago, there was evidence that he took a bribe. He claimed he took it to gather evidence but that sounds more than a bit fishy. Supposedly his attempts didn’t end up changing the result of matches so was cleared of match fixing, but there were apparent efforts to do just that.

Fast forward to the Paqueta case, and without any clear evidence of wrongdoing to our knowledge, the FA want to ban him for life (if you believe the media sensationalism) for picking up a couple of yellow cards that have not altered the result of any game.

Doesn’t feel at all right to me. Like I say, if he’s guilty it should be a criminal fraud case, not a match fixing civil case where a couple of FA cronies decide if he is guilty and any subsequent punishment.

Hammer and Pickle 1:12 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
I have a horrible feeling this is just a colossal shitburg with the player at the visible tip being framed to cover up years of corruption involving FA officials, club employees and betting companies.

It absolutely reeks to high heaven.

Massive Attack 12:45 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
That was my thinking too, Ron. If it is as bad as the FA charge implies it to be, then it really should be more of a Police matter. Until then, this just looks all a bit amateurish trying to prove him guilty of something that's not all that obvious (from the info we know of).

I hope Paquetas Lawyers tie the GA up in knots and embarrass them if they really have shoddy circumstantial "evidence".

BRANDED 12:30 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
Either there is a causal link and he's guilty or they can prove a > 50% probability that they can give credence to based upon un biased analysis of data. The second is harder as analysing data is notoriously hard and you only have to give alternative data that might suggest another description of events.

Hammer and Pickle 12:07 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
The FA has set itself up as prosecutor, judge and jury in its own case. It won’t present evidence there was unusual betting activity nor show what connection there is to Paqueta other than he was carded.

They are out of control, are taking the piss and need to be brought into line by the legal system.

Ron Eff 11:32 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
Your logic is ok, Rossal, but if they had hard evidence they would, I assume, pursue a criminal charge and put him in front of a jury. Instead, it is a civil case where three people decide his fate. Is it right that three people can potentially decide a man’s career based on their assumption that he is involved?

GBHammer63 11:14 Tue Jun 4
Re: Paqueta
The only person who can guarantee Paqueta gets booked is the referee, I’m assuming that the video evidence of each offence will be looked at thoroughly and judged on whether any were worthy of booking the player. Standard of refereeing is so shit and could give an opportunity as to whether there should even have been a booking.
As has been mentioned, if it was a relative’s or friends benefit you’re trying to achieve, why would you wait until the 93rd minute?

Page 1 - Next

Copyright 2006 WHO.NET | Powered by: