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 midfielderthis season."

[MaryMillingtonsGhost]

Could be entirely made-up bullshit as I did read it on C&H, that the inquiry result is now due to be delivered next February!

[Any Old Iron]

The club and Paqueta need to absolutely slaughter the FA over this long drawn out fiasco
 

[Mike Oxsaw]

Whatever the outcome the media will side with the FA. They know who butters their toast.

[Iron Duke]

The FA have completely fumbled this investigation. They’ve taken two years and still haven’t come to a verdict. During all this time, they leaked stories to the press and basically called him out as guilty before a fair and impartial trial could take place. They hung the threat of a lifetime ban over his head. They stopped him from getting a transfer to Man City, and prevented us from getting a significant transfer fee, possibly with Cole Palmer in exchange for.

We should take them to the cleaners.

[Fauxstralian]

They had his phone for 8 weeks
Understandably in that case he got a new one
When they returned the old one he got rid of it as he had a new one
A bit later they asked for the first phone AGAIN and then pretended that getting rid of it was evidence of wrong doing
Desperate nonsense from utter incompetents
They owe us £85m

[kylay]

 

But it would need to have such evidence on there, right? If he hasn't said "Bet on the 34th minute" or suchlike, what can they garner from it? If he's done it all by calls, it could be clean?

I think the bigger issue is that the FA tried to come back later and ask for the phone again, at which time Paqueta had already gotten rid of it, and then they were trying to make that look nefarious through some spoliation argument. Oxsaw's point (I think) is that either they were too incompetent the first time round which shame on them OR they knew that didn't have a case from the first time and then tried make something of nothing which would be much worse than incompetence. Either way, it definitely sounds as though they don't have any evidence from the phone which other than that, how else are they going to get it apart from a witness?

[honky cat]

The other thing regarding the phone is, surely if youre planning a few betting shenanigans you'd hop down to Brazil Argos for a Nokia and a PAYG SIM card? Not use the top spec contract iPhone that everyone knows you have. 

​​​​​​

[Mike Oxsaw]

 If we and the player agree not to sue them.



 

I don't think member clubs or players can sue the FA.

I think that's just the Premier League, but I'm not 100%

 

 

I think the "Association" in the name might be a bit of a clue.

As I understand it, it's a "by invitation only" set up whereby in order to participate in FA managed games, you have to agree by the pseudo-private club rules. Generally this is limited to such things as the suitability of grounds for staging professional games, but the rules may well extend down to abiding by any decision the FA or their approved agents arrive at.

That being said, there may be a case of preventing a company (football club) from going about their legitimate professional business, which is staging and participating in Premier League matches against their peers and others as dictated by cup competition rules.

This spat is between the FA and Paqueta & the club, not the PL which I believe is a separate legal entity.

So if the club were able to sue the FA, it shouldn't affect their ability to participate in the Premier League.

The FA may well have a sulk on this and either have no referees available to officiate in games West Ham are scheduled to play, or they may introduce an undocumented, whisper in the ref's ear,  rule to fuck us up at every opportunity during the games to teach us who the real boss is around here.

[On The Ball]

The fuck up with the phone is the big give-away.

You can clone a phone and all it's contents in a matter of minutes - wrong'uns have been doing so since long before covid, long, even, before smartphones became available.

Asking for it again should therefore not be necessary unless the phone structure itself (a passive object) holds clues (never head of such a case).

Either they fucked up their clone (if they even had one in the first place) or it was as clear as the nose on your face back then that there was no case to answer.

Be interested to know why they couldn't advance and conclude the case in the absence of any input from the Brazilian FA - their only connection is that he's played a few times for the national team since leaving Brazil. None of the alleged offences involved any games they manage.

This is absolutely correct. I work in digital forensics and imaging a phone takes less than 2 hours typically and is standard in matters where cell data is in question if for nothing else preservation. The fact the FA were given unfettered access and seemingly failed to do this is a complete dereliction of duty.

But it would need to have such evidence on there, right? If he hasn't said "Bet on the 34th minute" or suchlike, what can they garner from it? If he's done it all by calls, it could be clean?

[Gank]

 If we and the player agree not to sue them.

 

I don't think member clubs or players can sue the FA.

I think that's just the Premier League, but I'm not 100%

[honky cat]

 If we and the player agree not to sue them.
 

I don't think member clubs or players can sue the FA.

[kylay]

The fuck up with the phone is the big give-away.

You can clone a phone and all it's contents in a matter of minutes - wrong'uns have been doing so since long before covid, long, even, before smartphones became available.

Asking for it again should therefore not be necessary unless the phone structure itself (a passive object) holds clues (never head of such a case).

Either they fucked up their clone (if they even had one in the first place) or it was as clear as the nose on your face back then that there was no case to answer.

Be interested to know why they couldn't advance and conclude the case in the absence of any input from the Brazilian FA - their only connection is that he's played a few times for the national team since leaving Brazil. None of the alleged offences involved any games they manage.

This is absolutely correct. I work in digital forensics and imaging a phone takes less than 2 hours typically and is standard in matters where cell data is in question if for nothing else preservation. The fact the FA were given unfettered access and seemingly failed to do this is a complete dereliction of duty.

[Mike Oxsaw]

The fuck up with the phone is the big give-away.

You can clone a phone and all it's contents in a matter of minutes - wrong'uns have been doing so since long before covid, long, even, before smartphones became available.

Asking for it again should therefore not be necessary unless the phone structure itself (a passive object) holds clues (never head of such a case).

Either they fucked up their clone (if they even had one in the first place) or it was as clear as the nose on your face back then that there was no case to answer.

Be interested to know why they couldn't advance and conclude the case in the absence of any input from the Brazilian FA - their only connection is that he's played a few times for the national team since leaving Brazil. None of the alleged offences involved any games they manage.

[Fauxstralian]

I wouldn’t be surprised if the FA are trying to strike a deal where Paqueta won’t be suspended if we and the player agree not to sue them.
Sullivan will want it wrapped up before the transfer window closes so he can be sold

[nychammer]

I would guess that the FA are getting all their legal soldiers lined up for the battles to follow, irrespective of the verdict. Probably the same reasons that the Man City charges have not yet been resolved.

what defence could the FA possible have for dragging this on indefinitely? They'd be better finding not guilty and settling on damages. Sullivan is cheap so flash a few notes and he'll probably take it. Whatever, I'd be making all sorts of noise to push the FA to act with the new season fast approaching. 

Why would they be settling on damages? They are following the rules about spot fixing. If you're going on about how long its taken, then perhaps it is because they had to first wait for the Brazilian FA to conduct and conclude their own investigation, and then after that Paqueta's lawyers delayed the FA's proceedings for over six months to collect there own defence.

Also, Paqueta has been able to play and earn his wages during the whole proceedings, so he hasn't lost anything and we, as a club, have not either as he has been available for every game.

possibly, but how longs has this debacle taken? the FA were investigating this most of this season and said it would be decided by a panel of experts by June and still we wait. Get on with it already FFS!!!!

[Fauxstralian]

We’ve lost the £85m fee Man City had agreed to pay
Paqueta has probably lost £10m in extra wages over 2 years on an enhanced City contract

[cheesebgt]

How is this still dragging on for a third pre season.
The club should instruct solicitors to offer an ultimatum  of legal action if this isn't wrapped up before the season starts.
Why has it taken so long?

It shouldn't affect another season for the club or player, simply unfair on the club in particular who have undoubtedly done nothing wrong but have lost tens of millions in a transfer fees and the effectiveness of one of our best players.



 

I would guess that the FA are getting all their legal soldiers lined up for the battles to follow, irrespective of the verdict. Probably the same reasons that the Man City charges have not yet been resolved.

what defence could the FA possible have for dragging this on indefinitely? They'd be better finding not guilty and settling on damages. Sullivan is cheap so flash a few notes and he'll probably take it. Whatever, I'd be making all sorts of noise to push the FA to act with the new season fast approaching. 

Why would they be settling on damages? They are following the rules about spot fixing. If you're going on about how long its taken, then perhaps it is because they had to first wait for the Brazilian FA to conduct and conclude their own investigation, and then after that Paqueta's lawyers delayed the FA's proceedings for over six months to collect there own defence.

Also, Paqueta has been able to play and earn his wages during the whole proceedings, so he hasn't lost anything and we, as a club, have not either as he has been available for every game.

[nychammer]

How is this still dragging on for a third pre season.
The club should instruct solicitors to offer an ultimatum  of legal action if this isn't wrapped up before the season starts.
Why has it taken so long?

It shouldn't affect another season for the club or player, simply unfair on the club in particular who have undoubtedly done nothing wrong but have lost tens of millions in a transfer fees and the effectiveness of one of our best players.


 

I would guess that the FA are getting all their legal soldiers lined up for the battles to follow, irrespective of the verdict. Probably the same reasons that the Man City charges have not yet been resolved.

what defence could the FA possible have for dragging this on indefinitely? They'd be better finding not guilty and settling on damages. Sullivan is cheap so flash a few notes and he'll probably take it. Whatever, I'd be making all sorts of noise to push the FA to act with the new season fast approaching. 

[easthammer]

How is this still dragging on for a third pre season.
The club should instruct solicitors to offer an ultimatum  of legal action if this isn't wrapped up before the season starts.
Why has it taken so long?

It shouldn't affect another season for the club or player, simply unfair on the club in particular who have undoubtedly done nothing wrong but have lost tens of millions in a transfer fees and the effectiveness of one of our best players.

 

I would guess that the FA are getting all their legal soldiers lined up for the battles to follow, irrespective of the verdict. Probably the same reasons that the Man City charges have not yet been resolved.

[RootsRadical]

How is this still dragging on for a third pre season.
The club should instruct solicitors to offer an ultimatum  of legal action if this isn't wrapped up before the season starts.
Why has it taken so long?

It shouldn't affect another season for the club or player, simply unfair on the club in particular who have undoubtedly done nothing wrong but have lost tens of millions in a transfer fees and the effectiveness of one of our best players.
 

[Jean-Luc Paul Goddard]

Le Tissier had no pace. No work rate or stamina either. Wouldn't tackle or press at all. Much better as an attacking midfielder than Paqueta but it's a bit apples and oranges comparing the two. 

[Gank]

Thunder, you don't know what you're talking about. Would Le Tissier have been even better if he could beat a man for pace? Of course he would.

[Massive Attack]

As in compared to others when running (without the ball).

[THUNDERCLINT]

Oh for sure lightning quick with the ball at his feet, I'm on about without the ball he never appeared at all quick to me.

He didn't have to rely on it so was never really an issue. Just like it never was for say someone like Sheringham, they were always 1 or 2 steps ahead in other ways.

If he was quick with the ball at his feet he was quicker without it. No one is slower running with the ball.

[Massive Attack]

Oh for sure lightning quick with the ball at his feet, I'm on about without the ball he never appeared at all quick to me.

He didn't have to rely on it so was never really an issue. Just like it never was for say someone like Sheringham, they were always 1 or 2 steps ahead in other ways.