Paqueta - Latest news

[Alan]

"Sport Bible New report on Lucas Paqueta's spot-fixing charges reveals how much of next season West Ham star can play There has been an update on Paqueta's case. Alex Brotherton Lucas Paqueta will be free to play for West Ham for most of next season despite facing spot-fixing charges. Paqueta has been charged by the Football Association with four separate instances of spot-fixing. The 28-year-old stands accused of deliberately getting himself booked during four Premier League matches. It is one of the most serious cases of spot-fixing involving a top-flight player in England, and could land Paqueta with a lengthy ban. However, the Brazil international can continue to play until the disciplinary process has been completed. According to The Times, the outcome of the process could be delayed until the end of the 2024-25 season or beyond. That is due to the complexity of the case; Paqueta's lawyers say it will take many months to secure all the witness statements and relevant information they need for their defence. That's because the case spans three countries - England, Brazil and Spain - and involves a large number of people. The charges allege that Paqueta got himself booked during matches against Leicester City, Aston Villa, Leeds United and Bournemouth over the past two seasons so that “one or more persons” could profit financially. The investigation that preceded the charges took eight months. In September 2023, Brazilian outlet Globo reported that suspicious gambling patterns were identified in Brazil relating to Paqueta being booked against Aston Villa in March that year. The bets were reportedly made using West Ham's shirt sponsor Betway, via accounts belonging to people linked to Paqueta. The FA initially gave the player until June 3 to respond to the charges, but his lawyers were granted an extension. English football's governing body has refused to put a timescale on the case. Paqueta has been linked with a move to Brazilian giants Flamengo this summer, but this latest development will give encouragement to new West Ham boss Julen Lopetegui that he can use the midfielder this season."

[Ron Eff]

Absolute pricks on proven breach of the communications point. Because they gave his phone back having not found anything and he had got rid by the time they thought they better have another look because they aren’t finding any evidence. 

Don’t quite know why it’s thought to be so ridiculous that he takes counter action. This agenda, based on frankly,  circumstantial evidence of some minor bets on a regularly booked player getting booked in quite typical fashion, which then took two years to find him not guilty, or not proven as they feel the need to use, when a case that was linked and allegedly happened concurrently in Spain was disregarded very swiftly by the Spanish FA; all of which cost him a potentially career changing move to Man City, and meant he had to live with a cloud over him for two years, knowing that the FA were seeking a lifetime ban which would ruin his career when in his prime and arguably have an extremely detrimental impact on his life.

I’d suggest it’s actually more ridiculous to think he might not be considering it. Maybe he just wants to get on with his life now, but the FA have made a proper dogs dinner of this. 

[Mex Martillo]

What bunch of utter cunts. There accusations were shown to be unproven so they find him guilty of not cooperating with their incorrect accusations. What a load of wank. 
Make us cunts look like normal nice straight forward people.

[greenie1]

Is this issue referring to when he handed over his phone, they checked it, gave it back, he then got rid of the phone, they asked for it again.

[El Scorchio]

"not proven"

wankers.


"Paqueta was also charged with two counts of failing to co-operate with the investigation after breaching "FA Rule F3 in respect of alleged failures to comply pursuant to FA Rule F2", which relates to providing information and documents.He also denied these charges, but the regulatory commission found them to be proven and will "decide an appropriate sanction for these breaches at the earliest opportunity".

This is probably just face saving for them so they get something and don't look like utter chumps after all the fanfare and the fuss. Guess it's going to be to do with having lost or 'lost' his phone after they gave it back to them before they asked for it again. Probably not too severe a punishment, you'd think and hope.

[oioi]

What are the odds on him getting a yellow against Chelsea?

[Lee Trundle]

Hope he sues the FA

Don't be so ridiculous.

[goose]

"not proven"

wankers.


"Paqueta was also charged with two counts of failing to co-operate with the investigation after breaching "FA Rule F3 in respect of alleged failures to comply pursuant to FA Rule F2", which relates to providing information and documents.He also denied these charges, but the regulatory commission found them to be proven and will "decide an appropriate sanction for these breaches at the earliest opportunity".

[northbankfrank]

Hope he sues the FA

For what?

[LeroysBoots]

Hope he sues the FA

[Far Cough UKunt]

Club statement:

https://www.whufc.com/news/west-ham-uni ... as-paqueta

[Massive Attack]

Whatever happens to him Pick-up a-card-Paqueta owes us. We either get decent money for him when he does eventually go or he finally pulls his finger out and plays more to his potential. 

[Full Claret Jacket]

To be honest it's always the players decision. Every time you try and keep a player who wants away then you will lose out and usually end up doing a worse deal. 

I wouldn't want to play in a league either where you have been accused and will be scrutinised every game for an excuse to suspend you. The FA will not like being wrong - especially if they thought they had enough evidence to charge him. 

I'd love to see him play for us next season and be one of the leagues impact players but if his heart isn't in it then let him go and try and enjoy football elsewhere but get a bit of money you can invest and a big sell-on fee if he transfers back to a big club for a big fee in a future window. 

[yngwies Cat]

You think now that the Lionesses are home the FA going to fess up and announce something? 

[F 129 Row66]

northbankboy68 » 26 Jul 2025, 21:14The FA, as with most things in Britain, is on the slide.  A country that chooses the likes of Cameron, May, Johnson and Truss as Prime Minister deserves the Sweet FA.

But much to our credit we didn't elect Commissar Jeremy with his dynamic duo of Butler and Abbott., flopping around the front bench liked beached wales. That would have been stupid.

[Moncurs Putting Iron]

So Kudus and Paqueta out and a Liverpool reserve in... I'd rather keep Paqueta.. That's if Elliot even wants to sign for us or we even want to pay what they want... Got to love this club. 

Just to be clear Fraser if I could have both the above players in the head space and setting of those days, especially European nights over him of course I would I am not blind or stupid.

But one has been a shadow for club and Country due to ego and attitude and the other has been head and reputation fucked by the FA  and understandably performance has suffered with question marks over if it will return and if he will want to do it in England.

At least Elliot has a future and unsullied promise of better days to come.

As someone has said having both in the squad yes please!

[twoleftfeet]

The FA, as with most things in Britain, is on the slide.  A country that chooses the likes of Cameron, May, Johnson and Truss as Prime Minister deserves the Sweet FA.

 Starmer

[northbankboy68]

The FA, as with most things in Britain, is on the slide.  A country that chooses the likes of Cameron, May, Johnson and Truss as Prime Minister deserves the Sweet FA.

[Mike Oxsaw]

A ridiculous - even spiteful - affair.

Two years to get to this.

If I recall, 2 years ago there was talk about us breaking into the Media Darlings club as Moyes seemed to have found a method that worked (later found out, possibly because Paqueta was distracted, probably because Sullivan wouldn't sanction the purchase of the players we needed to push on, maybe a combination of both).

Sponsors need a constant set of names in the Media Darlings club to maximise sales: can't be doing with "lesser" teams bouncing in and out, no matter how infrequently. Words had over a game of golf, you know how it works.

However, for us, it all seemed to go all pear-shaped from the moment this issue was raised. That's quite some coincidence.

[stubbo-admin]

[Gary Strodders shank]

Betway did not even have an official licence to operates in Brazil when these bets were placed

They then decided to pull out before an official launch with customers having to withdraw all funds in accounts already opened.

They were probably actively promoting themselves and offering inducements to sign up in Brazil and using various methods to do this.

They would of used Paqueta,s profile and being his clubs shirt sponsor as a marketing tool especially in the region of which he comes from.

The bets placed by his mates were probably on numerous markets including him to score be booked man of the match etc so absolutely no case to answer in my book.

A company that has been hauled over the coals by the regulator on numerous occasions including for accepting stolen money without the required anti money laundering checks being made and advertising on West Hams juniors web page gets no sympathy from me

Scumbags who deserve to lose their licence to operate in my opinion


 

[the exile]

We should all have a bet on him getting yellow carded in the first game of the season if he’s still a WHU player

Excellent idea!

[Iron Duke]

 Finally, for the bookmakers, perhaps they should stop offering such ridiculous markets if they don’t want people to place bets on them. It’s not a silly bet on the likes of Paqueta and Alvarez to be booked most games without anything untoward taking place. 

This for me is the crux of it. The bookies offer all these stupid bets and then get the hump when they have to pay out. If they are really serious about stopping foul play, they should stop offering odds for scenarios that could be easily manipulated, for example red and yellow cards, time of first throw in, people eating pies, etc.

[El Scorchio]

We should all have a bet on him getting yellow carded in the first game of the season if he’s still a WHU player

[Ron Eff]

As far as I understand it, the bets placed were very insignificant. They found nothing to incriminate him on his phone, such that they desperately tried to get it back after returning it to desperately find something. There was a case in Spain that was believed to be a scam in conjunction with the alleged Paqueta one, yet the Spanish FA saw very soon that there was no case to answer. 

On that basis, to not only charge Paqueta, but to do so seeking a lifetime ban and thereby potentially ruining a young man’s career and life, is fucking disgraceful. For it to take two years to conclude the case against him and let him freely get on with his life is absolutely disgusting. 

I’m sure it will be heavily caveated to stop any counter claim, but to my mind there is a massive case to answer here. For both club and player, but the former relatively insignificant vs the upheaval on the individual. 

Finally, for the bookmakers, perhaps they should stop offering such ridiculous markets if they don’t want people to place bets on them. It’s not a silly bet on the likes of Paqueta and Alvarez to be booked most games without anything untoward taking place. 

[THUNDERCLINT]

Claimed being prepared against the FA is MASSIVE.

Minimum of 140 million.

50 million profit on Paqueta sale.    80 million - 30 million Palmer fee.

Also claiming 90 million in lost value on Palmer based on potential 120 million sale value using current market equivalent (Wirtz)  

Looking at other potential associated losses.

Why do you make this shit up? 

Why are you so despised that someone thought starting a thread on why you're such a cսnt would recieve positive feedback AND it actually did?