What FA statement really tells us about Lucas Paqueta’s ‘nightmare’ betting case | OneFootball

The headline rather downplayed the significance of the news. “Lucas Paqueta update” was found on the FA website, a story ranked below “New clubs ready for FA Cup debuts”. Update? It could have been the end, given the existential threat to the Brazilian’s career. Indeed, until news broke last Friday that he was likely to be cleared, the expectation was that a lengthy – perhaps even lifetime – ban beckoned.

The FA’s language was rather dry; it was also different to Paqueta’s. The governing body described the allegations – that the West Ham midfielder had got booked deliberately in four different games, in instances of spot-fixing to influence the betting markets – as “not proven” rather than declaring him not guilty. They also said the regulatory commission had proved two breaches of Rule F3, relating to a failure to answer questions and provide information. A punishment will be determined in the future.

Paqueta, meanwhile, was more emphatic and emotional. “Since the first day of this investigation, I have maintained my innocence against these extremely serious allegations,” he said in a social media post. After two years in limbo, he could be forgiven for declaring victory.

In the wait for the written reasons, and further explanations surrounding three cautions in the 2022/23 season and one at the start of the 2023/24 campaign, some things can be said. It has been a long and damaging saga, for Paqueta personally and West Ham.

His tears when booked against Tottenham in May were indicative of the toll it took. He has played under suspicion and under pressure. It is understandable that a hugely gifted player’s performances have been mixed. He was better in 2023/24 than last season. Remarkably, he completed it without a Premier League assist, even if that was partly a consequence of his teammates’ faulty finishing. It would be wrong to trace West Ham’s dismal campaign purely to Paqueta – not among a poor choice of manager, director of football and signings – but it scarcely helped.

open image in gallery

Lucas Paqueta cried when he was booked in a game against Tottenham in May (Getty)

Before he was charged, Paqueta supplied the defence-splitting pass for Jarrod Bowen’s winner in the 2023 Conference League final to secure West Ham’s first trophy since 1980. After it, they had the hugely accomplished trio of Bowen, Paqueta and Mohammed Kudus for two seasons: the first was underwhelming, the second egregious underachievement, so it amounts to a missed opportunity.

Now Kudus is gone. Paqueta could have been, two years ago, when it seemed he was bound for Manchester City in an £85m deal. When the FA started to investigate Paqueta, City swiftly switched targets. It arguably came at a cost to everyone: Paqueta, 25 then, is 27 now and West Ham will never get £85m for him. Given some of their misadventures in the transfer market, some may say it would scarcely have benefited them if they did, but their budget seems smaller now.

open image in gallery

Paqueta with Manchester City manager Pep Guardiola in August 2024 (Getty)

Paqueta missed the chance to join the champions, potentially win the title that year, and perhaps take over from Kevin De Bruyne as the creator in chief. He could look from afar at City’s rebuild, see Tijjani Reijnders and Rayan Cherki bought – the latter from his old club Lyon – to form part of the new midfield, wonder if it would have been him and reflect his chance had disappeared. This was a fork in the road in his career.

City, meanwhile, scarcely found a like-for-like replacement. They signed the undistinguished Matheus Nunes who, Pep Guardiola later concluded, could not play in midfield in his team. It is safe to assume that Paqueta would not have spent swathes of the last year playing right back, as Nunes has.

Now there are suggestions Paqueta could rejoin Flamengo, flush with their funds from the Club World Cup, if not £85m of them. It is easy to understand why home could have an appeal after the last two years.

There is talk, too, of potential legal action, though even if Paqueta and West Ham have a case, that would bring no immediate return nor rewind time.

open image in gallery

Paqueta in pre-season action for West Ham this summer (Getty)

Yet it is also worth remembering that the FA have a duty to investigate credible allegations, even if the bets in question seemed so small that no one was likely to make a fortune. It may hardly have helped his cause that some of the wagers came from Paqueta island in Brazil. Sometimes, too, such things do take time, even if not necessarily two years. It was, the lawyers Blackstone Chambers claimed, the longest case in FA history.

This would appear to be one with no winners, with the possible exception of the successful QC Nick de Marco, and certainly not the FA. Paqueta, who was threatened with being the biggest loser and has been “living through this nightmare for two years”, as his wife put it on Instagram, can now at least play on.