Welcome Paquetá

24

Comments

  • alderzalderz
    He got a yellow at the end of the game for deliberate handball, and - presumably - someone won a large amount of money as a result. Pretty sus
  • EXETERHAMMEREXETERHAMMER
    Oh my, can't be happening.
  • LukerzLukerz
    alderz said:

    He got a yellow at the end of the game for deliberate handball, and - presumably - someone won a large amount of money as a result. Pretty sus

    It is but again hard to prove.
  • ScotHammerScotHammer
    It’s all a cunning plan to put City off 😜
  • claretandblueskyclaretandbluesky
    He is clearly not the brightest lad if it was a deliberate handball. A professional foul is far less likely to arouse suspicion.
  • ScotHammerScotHammer
    claretandbluesky said:

    He is clearly not the brightest lad if it was a deliberate handball. A professional foul is far less likely to arouse suspicion.


    “You’d only think that”. Sorry know it’s the wrong thread' but made me think of the Princess Bride, battle of wits scene. If you’re never seen the film you should!
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    So, it's a Daily Mail story, picked up by everyone else.

    I waded into the gutter, so you don't have to - no thanks needed. just send soap.

    What the Mail says is fact:

    FA has initiated an investigation. (They don't say how they know - FA hasn't commented, or announced anything.)
    Paqueta hasn't been interviewed by FA.


    What they report, stating it comes from:
    'sources' (unidentified) are reported to have said Paqueta will seek legal advice

    Other things DM article report:
    Paqueta 'is said to be' shocked and 'privately' proclaiming his innocence. No indication given by DM where this come from, not even 'sources'. They also diplomatically don't offer a view on this. But are content to sling a bit of mud.

    There were claims (no indication given by DM of by whom made - maybe they read it on Twitter) that the bets under investigation were placed in South America.

    They also state the fact that LP was given a yellow card towards the end of the match last week. They leave that there, for readers to add 2 and 2 to make 5.


    I hate this stuff. Don't make me do it again.
  • LukerzLukerz
    Reality is, if proven, he could not argue with a ban for life. Any intention to alter the integrity of the game has to be stopped & spot-fixing is one of those. No event in a game should be orchestrated by a player due to financial gain for others. I hope there isn’t a wider implication for others at WHU.

    But investigating an incident in one game, is very different to being guilty.
  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    The Daily Mail were first reporting that Man City had put the transfer on hold because of the betting allegations in an article at about 5pm today. SSN were reporting earlier today that the transfer was on hold due to some issues. I very much doubt that City would take this action based upon a newspaper article. To my thinking it seems that City got wind of or informed of something some time before the story broke.
    Paqueta is quoted as saying he is shocked at the allegations and knows nothing about it. Again I would imagine he has been informed that there is or will be an investigation. The bets were apparently made on the Brazilian island from which he gets his name. It’s possible there is an investigation going on there of which he has been informed.
  • MrsGreyMrsGrey
    thornburyiron said:

    T
    Paqueta is quoted

    I can't see any quotes anywhere?
  • BazshuayiBazshuayi
    I guess the only way they can link him with it is to see who actually placed the bets and whether there are any trails to people Paqueta knows? Outside of that, as has been already mentioned, I don see how they can prove this.

    On a sort of connected note, it seems we were interested in Kudus whether Paqueta left this window or not. Which, if accurate, brings a sort of comfort as I think its better to get an advanced replacement in. Or maybe he's not a replacement but competition (yes I am being optimistic on that). Fact is, I think he is worth getting purely on the premise Paqueta is unlikely to be with us long term.
  • PrestonHammerPrestonHammer
    You don't think they've seen that the bets were made on Paqueta island and the FA have just assumed it must be Paqueta himself whose made the bets? Hahaha
  • BazshuayiBazshuayi
    For me, if he's not involved, I'd imagine that at least one person sees that his temperament and tackle often see him booked? But to go and back that up with 'big' bets either mean they have money to waste or feel its going to be a decent possibility (or a certainty - dramatic music!)
  • BubblesNeverDiesBubblesNeverDies
    MrsGrey:
    "for readers to add 2 and 2 to make 5"

    What, you mean it doesn't? Just look here:

    1984
    Book One, Chapter VII: 2 + 2 = 5


    Apologies to EB ;)
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    edited August 2023
    MrsGrey said:

    thornburyiron said:

    T
    Paqueta is quoted

    I can't see any quotes anywhere?
    There weren't any quotes from Paqueta

    It was "sources close to" but in this world of Social Media "Chinese whispers" sources become words direct from the player's own mouth

    See Harry Maguire saying he felt he was insulted by West Ham
  • claretandblueskyclaretandbluesky
    Lukerz said:

    Reality is, if proven, he could not argue with a ban for life. Any intention to alter the integrity of the game has to be stopped & spot-fixing is one of those. No event in a game should be orchestrated by a player due to financial gain for others. I hope there isn’t a wider implication for others at WHU.

    You mean like Zouma or Antonio having put the 50k bet on. =)
  • stevesteve
    Left out of the Brazil squad
  • buffybegoodbuffybegood
    Personally I find this hugely concerning and feel it could very well end up being a massive blow to the club; a hugely valuable asset could be made worthless if he's found guilty.

    Admittedly we don't know many facts atm, but allegations seem to suggest the first thing amiss was our game v Villa on 12th March. Paqueta was backed down to odds on to be booked which is suspicious in itself, especially given that he'd only had 3 previous bookings at that point. A number of new accounts were opened prior to the game which placed maximum stake bets on Paqueta getting booked; those accounts were linked to Paqueta Island which has a population of less than 3,500 including friends and family of Paqueta.

    If these reports (not that he deliberately got booked, just the new accounts and large bets etc) are correct, then it really doesn't look good imo; quite what level of proof is required for FIFA/the FA I don't know, but it could well be less than a criminal court would demand.

    It's not beyond the realms of possibility that Paqueta's career is over; Stratford Town’s Kynan Isaac was given a 10 year ban by the FA for ‘influencing a football betting market during Stratford Town FC v Shrewsbury Town FC on 7 November 2021 by intentionally seeking to be cautioned by the match referee’.

    Obviously things are at a very early stage as far as information coming out in concerned, and we've yet to hear Paqueta's side of the story but I've got a very bad feeling about this.

  • LukerzLukerz
    It does seem suspicious…the issue will be can you find hard evidence?
  • WHU_Champo_league_in_7_yearsWHU_Champo_league_in_7_years
    Very well could've just ended his career

    Tony ban was severe, but the end of the day he was betting on himself to score / Brentford to win when he was playing, something he couldn't "assure" it was going to happen

    If he bet that he wouldn't score that's something he could ensure that he didn't

    And the bets about Brentford losing were only when he wasn't playing so he couldn't affect the result

    If Paqueta has helped people make bets on him getting a yellow card, that's something he could ensure happened which it looks the case

    Obviously, all speculative, but if that's what he done...deliberately getting a yellow card when asking people he knew to bet on him to do so, that's a career ender right there
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    Lukerz said:

    It does seem suspicious…the issue will be can you find hard evidence?

    Thats why its called an investigation.
  • LukerzLukerz
    edited August 2023
    They didn’t manage to with Xhaka. That was also called an investigation.

    What I find weird is his yellows have come in the final 1/4 of the game. If he was intentionally getting booked, it’s a bit odd to leave it until that late. The Villa one was almost 70 minutes, he was subbed not long after. Could’ve been subbed before or injured. Unless Moyes is in on it too.

    Depends if yellow is meant to be a general yellow or for a specific offence & can you bet based on timing? I’ve never bet so don’t know.
  • IronHerbIronHerb

    😂
  • SlackerSlacker
    Brilliant.👏👏
  • SlackerSlacker
    MrsGrey said:

    So, it's a Daily Mail story, picked up by everyone else.

    I waded into the gutter, so you don't have to - no thanks needed. just send soap.

    What the Mail says is fact:

    FA has initiated an investigation. (They don't say how they know - FA hasn't commented, or announced anything.)
    Paqueta hasn't been interviewed by FA.


    What they report, stating it comes from:
    'sources' (unidentified) are reported to have said Paqueta will seek legal advice

    Other things DM article report:
    Paqueta 'is said to be' shocked and 'privately' proclaiming his innocence. No indication given by DM where this come from, not even 'sources'. They also diplomatically don't offer a view on this. But are content to sling a bit of mud.

    There were claims (no indication given by DM of by whom made - maybe they read it on Twitter) that the bets under investigation were placed in South America.

    They also state the fact that LP was given a yellow card towards the end of the match last week. They leave that there, for readers to add 2 and 2 to make 5.


    I hate this stuff. Don't make me do it again.

    Just reading that has made me need another shower.
    Your grateful readership applauds you Mrs. G.

  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    edited August 2023
    City pulled out on Thursday morning, long before the Mail or any other media broke the news.
    According to this mornings main news the bets related in the main to Brazil matches at the World Cup.
    Proving he knew of the bets in advance may be difficult to prove but if it can be then he’s done for.
  • IronHerbIronHerb
    City were probably made aware by West Ham or the FA and were referred to as "confidential issues" in the reports.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    Paqueta didn't get booked at the 2022 World Cup so that seems unlikely

  • thornburyironthornburyiron
    Why is it necessarily unlikely. If as he claims he knew nothing of any betting then his not getting booked could indicate innocence.
    However an example being quoted of double bets on the day we played Villa if true would seem more than co-incidental for two players in different countries to both get late yellow cards.
  • ASLEFshruggedASLEFshrugged
    edited August 2023
    Er, what?

    Why would he be subject of an investigation if bets had been placed but he didn't got booked at any of the World cup matches?

    The only reason there would be an investigation is if there was any possibility that he deliberately get himself booked so that the bets would be paid

    The Villa yellow was in the 70th minute. Late?
Sign In or Register to comment.