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."

[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.

 

I knew they’d do that. I think I said a few weeks back. They’ve spent 2 yrs trying to figure out how to stop them from being sued basically. 
The FA haven’t cleared Paq, an independent tribunal has. As far as they are concerned the fact that he in their opinion wasn’t helping them solve the case means they have reason to still be suspicious and thus them bringing the charge was justified. 

they will think that will legally protect them from being sued because their actions were “reasonable”. 

I dunno… but what u need is a very rich man who will drag them through the courts forever until they cry for mercy.. Maybe Sullivan has it in him? That’s a lot of money he lost and so has Paq. But I suppose Sullivan can have a chat with them about that at the local “lodge meeting” lol 

 

 

Yeah, I think so too. All this delay has been about face saving and not looking silly and making sure they got a concession in this other charge to pretend this hasn’t all been a waste of everyone’s time and money 

[Mad Dog]

I thought we weren't allowed to sue them or fifa

[El Scorchio]

Simon Jordan is a slimy smug cսnt but I have to agree with what he said about Paqueta (of course in a way which heavily insinuated he was guilty but got lucky) in that it’s not necessarily wise to go after the FA as then he leaves himself open to further scrutiny. Implying that he must be an admission of guilt if he doesn’t. Don’t necessarily like his assertions but it’s probably wisest for the player to just let it lie. Us however as an innocent party could have a go. Probably only if he should leave for less than 85 million quid though depending on how close to completion that deal actually was. Don’t know if we have a case if Paqueta stays. 

[threesixty]

"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.

 

 

I knew they’d do that. I think I said a few weeks back. They’ve spent 2 yrs trying to figure out how to stop them from being sued basically. 
The FA haven’t cleared Paq, an independent tribunal has. As far as they are concerned the fact that he in their opinion wasn’t helping them solve the case means they have reason to still be suspicious and thus them bringing the charge was justified. 

they will think that will legally protect them from being sued because their actions were “reasonable”. 

I dunno… but what u need is a very rich man who will drag them through the courts forever until they cry for mercy.. Maybe Sullivan has it in him? That’s a lot of money he lost and so has Paq. But I suppose Sullivan can have a chat with them about that at the local “lodge meeting” lol 

[Mad Dog]

Don't forget that slimy cսnt starmer

[Mike Oxsaw]

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. 

 

 

We has a discussion about this earlier. The very first thing the FA would/should have done is make 2 clones of his phone. A clone.by definition is an exact copy of (the contents of) his phone.

The first clone you put in a safe, or give to your solicitor/legal team - anything to prevent it being tampered with.

At this point there is no need or reason to retain the phone, so it can be handed back, which it was.

You then go through the phone contents on the 2nd clone from which you will (WILL) find any incriminating evidence, should it exist. 

I suspect it quickly became clear that there was no such evidence so they assumed the cloning failed and wanted the phone to clone it again - or more likely, they arrogantly threw the case at some work-experience schoolkid who, having fucked up the first clone was given the second, which they promptly also fucked up.

Left with absolutely no way to prove their claim, they started a "war of attrition - a spiteful, face-saving war of attrition".

Paqueta handed over his phone as requested, so absolutely nothing to prove on that action. The FA handed it back, so, again nothing to prove in that activity.

Unless Paqueta was given a legal instruction as to what he could and could not do with the phone (his own personal property) while it was back in his possession, I can't see that the FA have any case whatsoever here.

If they had any concerns about missing data/information/content then they simply should have kept the phone until they were happy they'd dug in as deeply as technically possible and there was nothing more for them to retrieve.

They should absolutely not be given any chance whatsoever to save face on this; their incompetence should be the headlines on every sports back page every time such a case arises.

Still, I suppose it paves the way for Manchester City to be cleared of all wrong-doings.

[XKhammer]

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.

 

 

 

Only two of those won an outright majority...so how did the country choose May and Truss?

[honky cat]

Well its great thats over the FA havent come out of this with any credibility 

however - the cսnt will probably put in a transfer request now . . .

no smoke without fire. If youre on a  +100k a week or whatever, you need to go out of your way not to get dragged into shit like this, either by keeping the entourage in check, or maybe just not picking up soft yellows every week . .

He owes us a good season.

[Lee Trundle]

Imagine the poor bloke who had to sift though his phone.  There's probably endless amounts TIK TOK videos of him dancing around.

[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