AFFILIATE SEARCH | Shop Amazon.co.uk using this search bar and support WHO!
Paqueta
-
Mex Martillo
- Posts: 1445
- Location: Catalonia
- Old WHO Number: 11796
- Has liked: 134 times
- Been liked: 175 times
Re: Paqueta
Can anyone explain to me why they do not go after the people that actually placed the bets?
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
-
MaryMillingtonsGhost
- Posts: 730
- Old WHO Number: 300173
- Has liked: 386 times
- Been liked: 256 times
Re: Paqueta
Hammer and Pickle" wrote: ↑02 Oct 2024, 18:15 The thread topic, wanker; have you got anything to say on it?
Yep.
Don't have a scooby if he's guilty of the charges or not.
Now, about your 'they is' quote?
Don't have a scooby if he's guilty of the charges or not.
Now, about your 'they is' quote?
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
-
MaryMillingtonsGhost
- Posts: 730
- Old WHO Number: 300173
- Has liked: 386 times
- Been liked: 256 times
Re: Paqueta
Why do you find it so difficult to answer an honest question Emily?
Where did the 'they is' comment come from?
Where did the 'they is' comment come from?
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
-
MaryMillingtonsGhost
- Posts: 730
- Old WHO Number: 300173
- Has liked: 386 times
- Been liked: 256 times
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
-
MaryMillingtonsGhost
- Posts: 730
- Old WHO Number: 300173
- Has liked: 386 times
- Been liked: 256 times
Re: Paqueta
Hammer and Pickle » 24 Sep 2024 14:54
is, not are, you hapless illiterateCome On You Irons" wrote: ↑24 Sep 2024 12:45
The amount of excuses that get wheeled out for Paqueta are truly laughable.
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
Re: Paqueta
No. I am genuinely not interested in who they are.
Oh and you are nitpicking about wreak havoc on a career and wreck a career.
Well done - point scored.
Oh and you are nitpicking about wreak havoc on a career and wreck a career.
Well done - point scored.
-
stubbo-admin
- Posts: 956
- Old WHO Number: 12009
- Has liked: 226 times
- Been liked: 442 times
Re: Paqueta
Full Rug" wrote: ↑02 Oct 2024, 16:12Ron Eff" wrote: ↑02 Oct 2024, 15:07 That might be true, but that opens them up for a hell of a counter case in the event of lack of evidence, surely? He’s not just going to accept his career and potential earnings being ended on circumstantial evidence, much like the club aren’t going to accept an asset being liquidised without hard evidence of something that he would be found guilty of in a criminal case.
On the balance of probability, I’d guess that they’d like to avoid that, and therefore predict a ban in line with other betting cases recently, and I’d wager all on his side will take it on the chin.
All opinions though, innit.No, it's not opinions. Some of you just can't get your heads around the difference between a court of law, and the court of arbitration.
His case is nothing like the other recent betting cases ffs, this has been done to death. If you think that, then there's really no point trying to explain any further to be honest.
That's not quite true. It's nothing like the Ivan Toney or Sandro Tonali events.
It's considered notably more serious than that and has parallels to the guy that played non league and was banned for 10 years.
It's an FA hearing, but panelled by 3 independent adjudicators I believe who decides if they consider it more likely than not he did it.
If it goes against him (and us) he can of course appeal to deemed higher bodies, all the way up to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, and even the ECHR, to courts where the burden of proof is greater, and could claim restraint of trade or some such you'd think, and if successful could sue for loss of earnings...but such a claim would take years, and he'd be banned while it took place as well as unsaleable (which wouldn't help us) so in reality the FA outcome is what will dictate where we land.
It's a precarious position which of course we all hope he is not guilty of...but given the level of evidence required, it doesn't exactly look promising.
It's considered notably more serious than that and has parallels to the guy that played non league and was banned for 10 years.
It's an FA hearing, but panelled by 3 independent adjudicators I believe who decides if they consider it more likely than not he did it.
If it goes against him (and us) he can of course appeal to deemed higher bodies, all the way up to the Court of Arbitration for Sport, and even the ECHR, to courts where the burden of proof is greater, and could claim restraint of trade or some such you'd think, and if successful could sue for loss of earnings...but such a claim would take years, and he'd be banned while it took place as well as unsaleable (which wouldn't help us) so in reality the FA outcome is what will dictate where we land.
It's a precarious position which of course we all hope he is not guilty of...but given the level of evidence required, it doesn't exactly look promising.
-
Mike Oxsaw
- Posts: 3969
- Location: Flip between Belvedere & Buri Ram and anywhere else I fancy, just because I can.
- Old WHO Number: 14021
- Has liked: 16 times
- Been liked: 396 times
Re: Paqueta
These people who are trying to wreak Paqueta's career. Are they also Far-Right, thus making them impossible to identify and quantify?
-
MaryMillingtonsGhost
- Posts: 730
- Old WHO Number: 300173
- Has liked: 386 times
- Been liked: 256 times
Re: Paqueta
Hammer and Pickle » 02 Oct 2024 16:38
OK, I'll try again.
Who are these people who are 'clearly desperate for the FA to wreak (sic) Paqueta’s career?
Are we talking about poster(s) on this site?
An extremely simple question, and one that I'm certain someone of your startling intellect can answer.
By suggesting that you're 'not interested in who they are' gives me the impression you're talking out of your arse. Again.
OK, I'll try again.
Who are these people who are 'clearly desperate for the FA to wreak (sic) Paqueta’s career?
Are we talking about poster(s) on this site?
An extremely simple question, and one that I'm certain someone of your startling intellect can answer.
By suggesting that you're 'not interested in who they are' gives me the impression you're talking out of your arse. Again.
Last edited by MaryMillingtonsGhost on 02 Oct 2024, 17:45, edited 1 time in total.
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
Re: Paqueta
Why, the people who are clearly desperate for the FA to wreak Paqueta’s career. I’m not interested in who they are - all I am observing is they are strange and perverse.
Why don’t you ask me a proper question?
Why don’t you ask me a proper question?
-
MaryMillingtonsGhost
- Posts: 730
- Old WHO Number: 300173
- Has liked: 386 times
- Been liked: 256 times
Re: Paqueta
Hammer and Pickle" wrote: ↑02 Oct 2024, 17:09 What makes me think my thoughts?
Thoughts are combinations of language, logic and emotional energy that allow people to express their ideas.
HTH
OK, I'll make it easier for you to understand my original question.
What gives you the impression that 'we certainly have some very strange and perverse people following the club who are desperate for the FA to wreak (sic) Paqueta’s career in this way.'
What gives you the impression that 'we certainly have some very strange and perverse people following the club who are desperate for the FA to wreak (sic) Paqueta’s career in this way.'
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
-
Jaan Kenbrovin
- Posts: 1022
- Old WHO Number: 269499
- Has liked: 37 times
- Been liked: 202 times
Re: Paqueta
It’s not a CAS case, it’s an FA hearing.
The club are said to be looking at going to CAS to stop the hearing.
The club are said to be looking at going to CAS to stop the hearing.
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
Re: Paqueta
What makes me think my thoughts?
Thoughts are combinations of language, logic and emotional energy that allow people to express their ideas.
HTH
Thoughts are combinations of language, logic and emotional energy that allow people to express their ideas.
HTH
-
MaryMillingtonsGhost
- Posts: 730
- Old WHO Number: 300173
- Has liked: 386 times
- Been liked: 256 times
Re: Paqueta
Anyway, we certainly have some very strange and perverse people following the club who are desperate for the FA to wreak Paqueta’s career in this way.
Really?
What makes you think that?
What makes you think that?
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
Re: Paqueta
Anyway, we certainly have some very strange and perverse people following the club who are desperate for the FA to wreak Paqueta’s career in this way.
They walk among us.
They walk among us.
Re: Paqueta
Ron Eff" wrote: ↑02 Oct 2024, 15:07 That might be true, but that opens them up for a hell of a counter case in the event of lack of evidence, surely? He’s not just going to accept his career and potential earnings being ended on circumstantial evidence, much like the club aren’t going to accept an asset being liquidised without hard evidence of something that he would be found guilty of in a criminal case.
On the balance of probability, I’d guess that they’d like to avoid that, and therefore predict a ban in line with other betting cases recently, and I’d wager all on his side will take it on the chin.
All opinions though, innit.
No, it's not opinions. Some of you just can't get your heads around the difference between a court of law, and the court of arbitration.
His case is nothing like the other recent betting cases ffs, this has been done to death. If you think that, then there's really no point trying to explain any further to be honest.
His case is nothing like the other recent betting cases ffs, this has been done to death. If you think that, then there's really no point trying to explain any further to be honest.
Re: Paqueta
How would he take the FA to court for wrongful dismissal?
They don’t employ him.
All they’re doing is enforcing the laws of the game. If they’re proven to have enforced the laws set out then there’s no recompense.
They don’t employ him.
All they’re doing is enforcing the laws of the game. If they’re proven to have enforced the laws set out then there’s no recompense.
-
Hammer and Pickle
- Posts: 4006
- Old WHO Number: 211190
- Has liked: 99 times
- Been liked: 133 times
Re: Paqueta
Yes, the FA can ban him from playing by simply deciding he was deliberately trying to get carded while presenting the Paqueta Island betting as a motive. But if he he were to file a civil suit for unfair dismissal in a proper court of law, he could easily claim damages running into millions while the FA's claim he damaged the game or other players' careers is at best flimsy. Of course they are hoping for more evidence to emerge as right now they have dug themselves into a bit of a hole.