Paqueta Career in Ruins | West Ham Playmaker Facing a 10 Year Ban if Found Guilty 

Beautifully put. I salute you.

there's no financial incentive for a footballer to do this though, unlike other sports. They get paid a fortune & their pay isnt even reliant upon winning.

I thought the same with the snooker. Too many involved, all Chinese, so I feel there's something going on there. Two of them were great players and had great careers ahead. Money. Money ruins so much.

My thoughts too. Very few top sportspeople need to become embroiled in these practices for money.

Exactly what I was thinking. Who knows

Get your tin foil hats out

Thought the same

The silver lining. Well done my friend

Turn it in.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Unfortunately true in our eyes but it didn’t make us that much

A great moment really was, but moving forward having to replace a 50m player will hurt the team and budget going forward with this new westham feeling

Unless he gets injured in a match surely insurance claim

Belmarsh will have a great 5 a side team

@@alldone1116 Best bet is to claim duress and say his family was in danger - we won;t get a penny if he is banned unless we sack him and save contract money, No insurance against this sadly

Makes you wonder don't it

No doubt,he has looked a shadow of his former self

Thought the same

Yes.

Thought the same

Apart from the fact that we now won't have £80m to buy those players.

And the fact Kudus isn’t a striker

Totally agree. Kudus being the CAM could really unlock him. Looking forward to seeing what this coaching staff can come up with without Paqueta. Almost have to treat this like a career-ending injury to the guy and go from there.

@@kevinbarker7915 85*, and I still expect to see WH spend close to 100M this summer. Well in with FFP now and can operate somewhere around 190M at a LOSS this season. That's after ticket revenue, concessions, etc., etc., etc.

Does this mean the threshold is lower?

@@sp4rksmontana486yes. Needs to be probable (ie more than 50% chance), whereas in criminal law it must be beyond reasonable doubt

Outrageous if civil balance rather than criminal threshold...something that leads to a career destroying verdict and it's not the criminal threshold?...Totally wrong.

Yes! Made this point over on Reddit. They don't need to prove it absolutely, or beyond reasonable doubt. If they can show that the chances of both patterns of behaviour coinciding would be incredibly unlikely (and with multiple bets and multiple cards they likely are) then he's in big trouble. Seems possible this has been going on for years and he's caught up in something unpleasant. But his absolute denials mean it's likely too late to plead blackmail or extortion.

Can you go to prison in civil court cases?

I think it would be foolish to plan otherwise, maybe this could be EARTHY time to shine?? ...or is too soon?

Agree, I don’t want Geo as my defence lawyer 😂 the prosecutors have a duty of disclosure, which requires them to provide the defence with all relevant information and evidence that may be helpful, even if it hurts the prosecutor's case and prosecutor must give you a copy of all the relevant evidence against you before the date of your trial. Relevant evidence means anything that you could use to defend.

The beautiful thing about City's problems is that it's an FA charge rather than a legal one. All 115 breaches are in FA conduct, not law, so they can not be challenged legally. Paquéta if he is guilty, could face legal trouble. City can't take the FA to court, it's up to the FA to recognize city as a team in the first place. They have every right to throw City out of the FA, and no repercussions. Private organization. (You can tell I hate City). Lol.

I don't know if I would be super targeted on those 4 games rather than an overall view of the season or whole time in the EPL. It doesn't take much to wind him up, and for all we know someone was dripping poison in his ear on the phone, or had a fight with his wife and he was lashing out. I'm a pretty big perk, and I gaurentee you, it wouldn't take much to wind me up before a game and before the whistle blows, I know I'm getting a card. I'm a kids coach now, and there are certain other coaches that always get me carded because they play dirty.

@@grege8318 Sure, but the question for me is not the likelihood of him getting booked, it's whether 'substantial' bets were indeed placed on those particular games in which he did get get booked, and secondly if large bets were placed on him getting booked when it transpired that he didn't. I don't know if he's guilty or not, I only know that the FA have enough evidence to suspect him of being guilty. Suppose we just have to wait and see.

I just want to know how they are gonna prove it. He turned in his phone right away, but absent a recording of his calls, or text messages left on the phone like an amateur, just making phone calls isn't enough to do anything. Especially if he's calling half a dozen people a day back home. He can't be responsible for what happens at home if he don't know. The other thing is define substantial bet. 2500 bucks could be life altering in Brazil in a small place, but he makes 20 times that a week, so he could pay off his entire family's debts by Xmas. Unless there's a mob extortion thing going on, and there needs to be something put in place by FIFA about that, especially with more and more mega players coming from poor countries......

@@grege8318 You answered your own question there - 2500 placed by an average Brazilian would be a substantial amount. It's not Paqueta being accused of placing the bets, but people on Paqueta Island, but where that money is coming from or who exactly is placing the bets is something we're not privvy to, nor are we privvy to what evidence the FA think they have about LC's involvement. I agree that he could just give his money away and be above board, but sure enough, we as outsiders are well outta the loop. If there's mob involvement then that's something that Lucas needs to come clean about because if that's indeed the case, it's something that FIFA along with law enforcement do need to investigate.

@StonyStevenson75 yeah man, 1000% but the FA I'd targeting g him and his immediate family, not just random people on his home island. I a. Super willing to bet there's criminal activity, just not directly tied to him and his. FIFA needs to step in publicly and do something about the threats against players families from gangsters. You would have to be a hell of a player to move half your village to Europe and keep them all alive and cared for without being a superstar, and then there's always another person to chase for money. You never met your grandmother's sister but half your family is begging you to take the dive to save someone that half the family knows and loves. Hard to say no to that. I'm hopeful that we will see him cleared. Certainly didn't seem to be super different this year, so who knows. But FIFA has to do something because no one else is and we r seeing more and more players coming from places where 1 years salary for a first team bench player at city is enough to live forever like a king back home in Ghana or the Ivory coast. Same in South America, and like I said, there's always gonna be a hot button to push to make mobsters money. You see a lot of ex partners extorting players as well. Don't know if that's on players being bigger assholes or people being bigger thieves

I'm sure somehow Saudi FC can afford it

Nor did I, I’ve just read up about the group of islands, fascinating stuff if you’re interested.

No excuses players know the rules. Enough of them have been banned recently.

Yep deffo this. Probably tryna help out this mates without doing blatant handouts. Awareness is key.

If this is the case he has acted as a fool and as such his career is over and we should take him to the cleaners, because he has sullied our football club.

For Matchfixing?

To win totally different,

Betting on anything football related is wrong but there are levels to this. Betting on an outcome to win is wrong even though that's what players are playing to do. Betting on an outcome to loose is potentially match fixing and spot fixing is getting carded or sent off and makes betters insane odds so is looked at very seriously. This could be career ending and potentially could result in prison time because that is a criminal act.

While City evade this type of thing every year

@@stephenboyd4934 city are spot fixing are they? Turn it in grandma

@@DC-uf6ve what City are doing is worse Paqueta was a naughty boy, city are serial killers in comparison.

@@stephenboyd4934 totally different issues. City are accused of making hidden payments & manipulating FFP submissions. Paqueta is accused of taking deliberate bookings to spot fix & defraud bookmakers. One is “lying” (City) & one is “match fixing” (Paqueta).

That is what logic suggests, but i can't even imagine what kind of hard evidence they might have.

Bro, your team lost 70 Milions for cannot sell him.

🤣❤it!

​@@thelittlepikachu8241who cares he might win this and still no one wants him and he stays with us for the rest of he's career.

@@scottbarnard4659 He win, your club lose him to City for 70M. He lose, you club lose him for nothing.

@@thelittlepikachu8241 yes but we could keep him for another season and still gain 70 million. And who knows with City 115 charges what is City outcome. He might be innocent and in the end stay at West Ham.

Agreed. Spot fixing could be wiped out if they prevented these spurious bets on stupid things, particularly those that can be affected by a single player.

..or players can stop trying to commit fraud?

Said the same. Only way to stop it. In fact, go one step further and ban betting in football altogether, but they won't cos as we know football is only interested in the £

@@garino881 so you ban the entire betting industry from betting on sport because 1 player out of thousands tried to commit fraud and failed?

I wish I could bet on the number of poor takes on a given subject after each video. Money printer.

😂 👏

It’s a civil case but then the outcome becomes an actual crime right? And there is a 10 yr ban at stake. This goes to appeal for me regardless of the outcome. It has to be pretty water tight for you to ruin a career.

So are Man City’s charges civil or criminal coz if that’s the case then Man City will become extinct when they are found guilty ….💁‍♂️

@@SuperALBSURE Criminal would be a separate matter - it could be possible that someone is found liable under civil law but not guilty under criminal law, even in the same incident, as they have different standards of proof. So e.g. FA may have enough proof here but CPS may not

@@robertbryant1735 difficult really, I think there’s is a bit of both. FA have their own rules and I believe some of the charges relate to fraud, which would be criminal

Excellent point

I agree, however it looks like it’s for his friends rather than himself. Probably had a what’s app group with his pals and told them all to back him to get booked to earn them some wonga.

@@jimmyburch87 I get you but this is the premier league and West Ham not a back street team in Brazil where it probably goes on every week, I’ve watched the videos now and it looks well dodgy.

Its very easy because they look at betting patterns by time, amount and location and if there is a spike in betting compared to usual in a certain location, certain time and the amount people are betting then the connections from players to that area or group will be looked at, you can't hide your online footprint very well from authorities in this day and age.

He can be sanctioned on civil law (with lower burden of proof) and fined/banned. And then separately fail to be made guilty on criminal law. The two verdicts don't have to match. Most famously see OJ Simpson, innocent of murder at criminal trial but then responsible in civil court and fined $34m. Yes, it's America but the principle is the same in the UK.

@@SethBartonSEF yes. Say he gets banned and loses his career for 10 yrs. if the two cases don’t match we are saying a man is guilty of criminal behaviour but not tried in a criminal court? The CPS would have to prosecute as a crime has happened. At which point the FA would have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he did this. If they lose that then he can go back to court and ask for the FA to overturn their ban and pay damages. They actually need evidence or a confession or it’s a no go in the long run. This can’t be an internal matter for the fa and just some breaching of rules that they have. At the end of the day this is an actual crime and will be dealt with as such.

@@SuperALBSURE No, we would not be saying he is guilty of criminal behaviour. He would be liable under civil law and the punishment (10 year ban) would be civil, not criminal. Civil law and criminal law are 2 separate things - it is entirely possible for a person to be liable under civil law but not criminal law. Winning in a criminal case does not overturn the civil law decision

@@jamesgunn7 I just don’t understand how the FA are saying something illegal has happened which is a crime and yet not refer it to a criminal court? There’s one thing to bring a civil claim over a business dispute but this is actually a crime they are talking about here. It doesn’t make much sense to me at all.

Find it hard to find a positive considering we were expecting him to be gone in the summer anyway and have £85m in the kitty.

@@zanussidish5685 I honestly think Lopetegui and Tim are going to bring the best out of our club no matter what the team sheet says.

@@AbitLippy I agree but not knowing whether you have the money or the player isn't a positive.

@@zanussidish5685 yeah interesting couple of weeks ahead. Backs against the walls mould great people though.

I’d guess they do have more evidence than a “hunch” before they’ve charged him.

@@davidclerihew3539 That’s fine IF they can show it. If they can’t it’s going nowhere. Bets going in from random people isn’t enough. It can simply be put down to as a coincidence.

Ahahah RIP Moyesaurus

If he is found guilty we can sue him for contract breaches

No as that's pie in the sky but his contact is a different puppy. He abused his connection with the club & his contract. But saying this the FA are as bent as a ten bob note, just look at the way City are treated compared too other clubs.

Even if we could he’s not gonna have 50 million quid spare is he. Especially if he can’t work for 10 years.

Tim for the win

How often do you win?

They never change do they...

@@alldone1116 his a absolute major in the team if he was on the move out of wanting CL football he would have fetched 50 mill minimum . If he gets banned , he football wise will be on ice for seasons . Hammers board must be fuming as if he gets banned he has a transfer value of 0 zilch , nada .

At risk of sounding mean, latinos be like that.

In that, they grow up and live in a world where corruption is rife, inequality is rife, people who bend the rules never seem to be held to account and ‘the rules’ themselves are seen more as minor inconveniences to circumnavigate than things to obey. Which isn’t a bad thing. If I grew up in a world like that, I’d probably do the same.

I doubt he made any money from it himself. Probably done it to help out friends/family.

That's the way Alvarez plays. He's always been reckless for club and country.

@@kevinbarker7915 yeh but I mean for Paqueta judging him purely based of his footage isnt enough as others do similar tackles. They will need some sort of paper trail (messages etc) connecting Paqueta to the people in Brazil making the bets

@@drawde5762 I get what your saying, but Alvarez didn't have 4 huge bets come in from Alvarez island in Mexico the exact games when he got booked, Paqueta was hacking 2 or 3 players down in a rampage or deliberately handballing from a goal kick to get his yellows, they were beyond ridiculous, it depends when the bets came in too, if they were in play bets for Paqueta to get booked placed after the 90th minute and that's when the money went on (at much higher odds because there's no time left to get booked) and the handball was in the 93rd minute and Paqueta spent all of stoppage time trying to get booked, it makes the case much more indefensible. The likelihood of these bets being a coincidence...4 separate times must be 6 million to 1 and in a civil case they don't need a paper trail they just need it to be more likely than unlikely to have happened. It will be put to Paqueta to explain how people on Paqueta island that may well be his friends, family or known contacts (we don't know but they will have found out by now), how come they are the only people in the world winning huge money on him getting carded with huge amounts going on him to be carded with (possibly) in play bets just before he got carded in a ridiculous way....4 separate times, all from Paqueta Island. Our only hope is if our legal team can find a loophole, like someone's life was in danger or they find out if there were also huge bets that lost from Paqueta Island so then we can argue that the probability of our highest tackling player getting carded in 4 games when there were bets in lots of games isn't so improbable. Lets be real here, the only way these highly unlikely large bets from Paqueta Island combined with his highly questionable yellow cards could happen so regularly possibly with 100% success (that is key, so something they will look at) + if they were laid in play just before the bookings occurred (that is key too) is with inside information and only 1 person in the world could give them that information. There doesn't need to be a paper trail, they will just argue he could've told them in person or went through a 3rd party to pass on the information, if statistically they come to the conclusion the likelihood of it all being a coincidence is 8 billion to 1 then he is done We will have to hope the bets were not placed in play immediately before the bookings happened and that there were some losing bets too, the more losing bets the better, add that to his nature (temperamental, most tackles = most likely to get a card), hope they found no paper trail and no witnesses, then maybe we could argue people who knew Paqueta best might be able to make money from him getting booked because they know him best, BUT if the FA have gone back to 2022 and have been investigating for 9 month something tells me they know something more than we do that points to him being guilty

True, but standard of proof required by CPS and standard of proof in civil matters are totally different - a lot easier to prove liability in civil law than prove guilt in criminal law

@@jamesgunn7 I agree totally. Given the 4 games under scrutiny that have been made public, and the fact that on a small island off Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, people have allegedly opened accounts with a gambling company, and placed bets on what, on the face of it, was a dead cert IF, and I stress IF, a certain WHU player was/is involved. It would take a huge leap of faith not to consider the evidence, albeit possibly circumstantial, damning. What would help his case is if he has co-operated with the FA and given up his phone records and any other documents requested. But they'd only help if they didn't incriminate him obviously. An interesting few days and weeks ahead.

IF ?