West Ham Online

"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."

stubbo-admin wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 13:48

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

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.

fraser wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 07:38 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. 

northbankboy68 wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 21:14 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.

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.

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.

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


 

El Scorchio" wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 12:15 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

 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. 

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

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. 

twoleftfeet wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 11:33

THUNDERCLINT wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 10:57 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? 

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

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

THUNDERCLINT wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 10:57 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.

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

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.

easthammer wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 10:31 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

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

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

stubbo-admin wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 09:47

Mex Martillo" wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 09:16 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" wrote: ↑26 Jul 2025, 09:16 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.

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.

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