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."

[Pedro.]

To think we were getting Cole Palmer as part of the deal. 

I hope Paqueta stays. Will be really good this season. 

[twoleftfeet]

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? 

[El Scorchio]

Glad he’s cleared. Hope we take the FA to the cleaners. Also he’s 100 off ski now 

[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.

[Mike Oxsaw]

Apparently, from what I have read, the timing and formal release of the verdict is not in the control of the FA!
The FA informed West Ham of the fact that, as it was a truly independent tribunal, it was entirely down to the tribunal when their decision was to be made public. Obviously, the parties involved have got the information first, thus the leaking of the findings.

All this goes to show exactly why the FA procedures are not fit for purpose. This case must surely lead to all clubs insisting on a better system of dealing with future cases, not least off all any case based on "unusual betting patterns" I suspect this won't happen without the threat of serious claims for compensation from both player and club. But I guess that will be down whether or not the lawyers think they can be successful in such claims.

As for Paqueta going or staying at West Ham, IMO he should go but only if the price is right

Well, if that's the case, it just further muddies the water.

What can the "independent" tribunal gain from delaying the publication of the verdict - is a book/Netflix deal on the case about to be sealed?

[easthammer]

Apparently, from what I have read, the timing and formal release of the verdict is not in the control of the FA!
The FA informed West Ham of the fact that, as it was a truly independent tribunal, it was entirely down to the tribunal when their decision was to be made public. Obviously, the parties involved have got the information first, thus the leaking of the findings.

All this goes to show exactly why the FA procedures are not fit for purpose. This case must surely lead to all clubs insisting on a better system of dealing with future cases, not least off all any case based on "unusual betting patterns" I suspect this won't happen without the threat of serious claims for compensation from both player and club. But I guess that will be down whether or not the lawyers think they can be successful in such claims.

As for Paqueta going or staying at West Ham, IMO he should go but only if the price is right

[Fauxstralian]

I imagine he was supported mentally off the field
As he faced outrageous attacks threatening his livelihood from the FA led by Prince William 

[Mike Oxsaw]

Really pleased that charges are being dropped.
I never bought this shit.
Typical of these FA cunts that we STILL do not have the offical verdict!!! Unbelievable. What is so hard about making an announcement?
Hope we keep Paqueta.

Standard politics bollocks. Leak it, let it get discussed unofficially, and then by the time the official announcement comes that they have fucked up, it's old news and everyone has moved on.

It could be that they offered to tell the club and the player the verdict if they signed a temporary NDA lasting until the FA "officially" announce the verdict.

They most likely (more like hopefully) wanted either/both the club or player to blag instantly to the press which would, in their eyes, at least, prove (PROVE) the club/player "untrustworthy".

Full marks to Paqueta and the club for holding their tongue if this is the case - it sends out completely the opposite signal.

[stubbo-admin]

Really pleased that charges are being dropped.
I never bought this shit.
Typical of these FA cunts that we STILL do not have the offical verdict!!! Unbelievable. What is so hard about making an announcement?
Hope we keep Paqueta.

Standard politics bollocks. Leak it, let it get discussed unofficially, and then by the time the official announcement comes that they have fucked up, it's old news and everyone has moved on.

[Mex Martillo]

Really pleased that charges are being dropped.
I never bought this shit.
Typical of these FA cunts that we STILL do not have the offical verdict!!! Unbelievable. What is so hard about making an announcement?
Hope we keep Paqueta.

[Hello Mrs. Jones]

Whatever happens to him he will always be remembered for that one pass. 

[John Drake]

There wasn't any other option for the club other than to stick with him waa there? Hardly a selfless act!

[Fauxstralian]

Given his understandably distracted performances over the last two years I would hope he would want to thank the club for their support and show us the real Brazilian international 
If that means he then goes for something like the £85m Man City were prepared to pay later then so be it

Id like to see him, Elliot & Bowen working together after we bolster midfield with someone who can win the ball & get about the pitch to finally get us some midfield control in games 

[scott_d]

If there is a chance that he can rekindle some of the pre-accusation form then we definitely have to try and keep him.

Really hope this is a weight off his shoulder and we see the best of him at West Ham now.

You'd like to think he would stick by us like we've stuck by him.

[fraser]

Exactly that, when he receives the ball something sublime or utterly frustrating can happen... Or we can have the likes of JWP who never does anything other than bore me when he gets the ball.. I go to be entertained.. Its looking less and less likely that I will be this season. 

[stubbo-admin]

Paqueta is about the most West Ham player you can get. Talented, a maverick, takes the piss with moments of genius, inconsistent, a bit of a bastard, likes a dirty tackle.

If there is a player that defines out Club and we should keep above all else it's Paqueta. The guy who gets you off your seat one minute, and leaves you exasperated the next.

 

[Gank]

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. 

✓✓100%✓✓

[fraser]

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. 

[Moncurs Putting Iron]

It feels like they left it for as long as possible to mess up any transfer plans he and we have.

Oh well. Whatever.

Everyone can move on and we get money for Elliot.
 

[XKhammer]

I assume that among the rules for being accepted into the association (it's not legally a company, it's a private club) are that you can't take legal action against either it or a fellow member.

Nothing, so far as I can see to stop a 3rd party - say, a player's agent - going for it and trying to tear them a new one.

Said agent could then buy shares in the club with the payout, should he choose to do so.

More insane waffle zźzzźzzźźzzz 

[Gank]

Nobody deserves to be put through something like that. Whatever he chooses to do, if he is cleared, I wish him well.

Hope they publish all the details of the case and the verdict to prove that it was all open and honest. If it's an independent inquiry, the FA has no jurisdiction to stop such publication.

Wouldn't be surprised if the outcome is "Not Proven", rather than "Innocent", again just so the suits save a bit of face.

I thought "not proven" was only a valid verdict for cases in Scotland. 

In legal cases, yes. This is neither a legal nor a civil case so they can make up any term of verdict they want and 'not proven' does sound like something they'd come up with. They'd be able to say that it doesn't mean not guilty and therefore both the player and the club would be better for not rocking the boat, accepting this result and moving on quietly.

[Dowies Love Child]

Nobody deserves to be put through something like that. Whatever he chooses to do, if he is cleared, I wish him well.

Hope they publish all the details of the case and the verdict to prove that it was all open and honest. If it's an independent inquiry, the FA has no jurisdiction to stop such publication.

Wouldn't be surprised if the outcome is "Not Proven", rather than "Innocent", again just so the suits save a bit of face.

I thought "not proven" was only a valid verdict for cases in Scotland. 

[Massive Attack]

He owes us now. One way or another for standing by him big time. 

[Mike Oxsaw]

Nobody deserves to be put through something like that. Whatever he chooses to do, if he is cleared, I wish him well.

Hope they publish all the details of the case and the verdict to prove that it was all open and honest. If it's an independent inquiry, the FA has no jurisdiction to stop such publication.

Wouldn't be surprised if the outcome is "Not Proven", rather than "Innocent", again just so the suits save a bit of face.

[Cabbige Savage]

GOOD TIMES