✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá

The Forum for all football-related discussion, including West Ham United FC. Our busiest Forum and the place to begin if you're new to KUMB.

Moderators: bristolhammerfc, the pink palermo, chalks, Gnome, last.caress, Wilko1304, Rio

Post Reply
User avatar
Ozza
Posts: 29062
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2004 4:41 pm
Location: Here, there, every f****** where
Has liked: 1084 likes
Total likes: 2684 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Ozza »

brooking_1980 wrote: Sun Jun 16, 2024 4:16 pm
Its a bunch of strange bets, open account, 1st thing they do is yellow card on Paqueta......they win, so they are trying to find a connection from Paqueta to the people placing the bet. As they can take circumstantial, its balanced in favour of the FA.
I mean if you take your West Ham specs off and just read that it sounds as bent as anything
User avatar
DublinDave
Posts: 5910
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2021 11:13 am
Location: Dublin
Has liked: 2989 likes
Total likes: 1878 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by DublinDave »

Ozza wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 3:56 pm I mean if you take your West Ham specs off and just read that it sounds as bent as anything
Probably because it is.
User avatar
Diogenes
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:07 pm
Has liked: 534 likes
Total likes: 1254 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Diogenes »

On the very little we know, and it is very little, I can only think that if they had very strong hard evidence, he would be banned already. No matter how dodgy it looks, I suspect the evidence is circumstantial only with no smoking gun. Lets be honest, if were to bet on Paqueta we would have more a chance on a yellow card than a goal! Of course, they could still find him guilty, but if only circumstantial, I would think that be open to endless appeals and even him taking the FA to court. At the moment, I believe the best case (and perhaps a plea bargin) would be the non co-operation charges. To be fair, everyone saves face if that were to happen.
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 22446
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 416 likes
Total likes: 1315 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

Was Toney was banned before the verdict?
User avatar
Ironing Board
Posts: 23188
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:11 am
Has liked: 2182 likes
Total likes: 1917 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Ironing Board »

He wouldn’t be “banned already.” We’ve been through this before with Toney. You get banned once the process has been carried out due to presumption of innocence.
User avatar
prophet:marginal
Posts: 44289
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:54 pm
Location: Got Into Something
Has liked: 888 likes
Total likes: 2155 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by prophet:marginal »

SammyLeeWasOffside wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 5:09 pm Was Toney was banned before the verdict?
No, he wasn't, but his proceedings differed when you come to note that, in the main, he accepted the charges, but had some put over for a later trial. He was allowed to continue to play for them up until he stood trial on the matters he denied.

Some might say that he was prompted by his club to hold back some guilty pleas, so that he could play for them for as long as possible.
User avatar
Ironing Board
Posts: 23188
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:11 am
Has liked: 2182 likes
Total likes: 1917 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Ironing Board »

prophet:marginal wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 5:27 pm No, he wasn't, but his proceedings differed when you come to note that, in the main, he accepted the charges, but had some put over for a later trial. He was allowed to continue to play for them up until he stood trial on the matters he denied.

Some might say that he was prompted by his club to hold back some guilty pleas, so that he could play for them for as long as possible.
What grounds would there be for an immediate ban/suspension given he is rejecting the charges?
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 22446
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 416 likes
Total likes: 1315 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

I think they could suspend him if he was still not cooperating with requests for information.

Apart from that he is eligible to play until there is a verdict. The fact he is eligible has no relevance to the strength or weakness of the case against him.
User avatar
yakandyeti
Posts: 871
Joined: Fri Nov 03, 2017 9:12 am
Has liked: 468 likes
Total likes: 71 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by yakandyeti »

Ironing Board wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 5:28 pm What grounds would there be for an immediate ban/suspension given he is rejecting the charges?
The only grounds I can think of are if they thought there was a high risk he'd keep doing it, and it could influence the outcome of games. But he'll be watched like a hawk now.
User avatar
prophet:marginal
Posts: 44289
Joined: Wed Nov 01, 2006 8:54 pm
Location: Got Into Something
Has liked: 888 likes
Total likes: 2155 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by prophet:marginal »

Ironing Board wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 5:28 pm What grounds would there be for an immediate ban/suspension given he is rejecting the charges?
I don't think there are such grounds, personally. He should be treated as if he is not guilty, until the evidence is produced that shows otherwise.
User avatar
Diogenes
Posts: 5351
Joined: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:07 pm
Has liked: 534 likes
Total likes: 1254 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Diogenes »

Ironing Board wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 5:26 pm He wouldn’t be “banned already.” We’ve been through this before with Toney. You get banned once the process has been carried out due to presumption of innocence.
Yes he would. If the evidence was unequivocal he wouldn't have a leg to stand on, let alone deny the charges. Sure you need due process, but that would only be what the repercussions are.
Norflundon
Posts: 117
Joined: Sun Dec 10, 2023 1:23 pm
Has liked: 11 likes
Total likes: 46 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Norflundon »

SammyLeeWasOffside wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 6:47 pm I think they could suspend him if he was still not cooperating with requests for information.

Apart from that he is eligible to play until there is a verdict. The fact he is eligible has no relevance to the strength or weakness of the case against him.
What I have seen anywhere is if he gets found guilty by the FA and I read somewhere the process after that would be appeals where he can then take it to fifa then Court of arbitration for sport and lastly some sort of Supreme Court in Switzerland.
Does anybody know if he can play whilst all that goes on??
User avatar
Denzil
Posts: 5437
Joined: Tue May 10, 2011 2:39 pm
Has liked: 376 likes
Total likes: 583 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Denzil »

There’s talk of ten year bans etc. Surely the evidence needs to be more than circumstantial for that. Then there’s his circumstantial evidence; what was the motive. Allegedly the amount won across all card bets for him was less than £100k which is not even a weeks salary for him. What would his cut be? 20%? Why would he fix bets for a couple of days wages.
User avatar
Italian Hammer
Posts: 2567
Joined: Thu Jan 09, 2003 8:32 pm
Location: God knows we need him
Total likes: 362 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Italian Hammer »

Denzil wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 10:30 pm There’s talk of ten year bans etc...
Just media speculation BS.... there is no way that info has come from the FA as it would prejudice the case
User avatar
Ironing Board
Posts: 23188
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2018 10:11 am
Has liked: 2182 likes
Total likes: 1917 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Ironing Board »

Italian Hammer wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 10:35 pm Just media speculation BS.... there is no way that info has come from the FA as it would prejudice the case
Prejudice doesn’t matter so much given it will be heard by a judge.
User avatar
Shabu
Posts: 12682
Joined: Thu Jul 23, 2020 6:38 am
Location: San Diego, CA
Has liked: 4271 likes
Total likes: 2095 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Shabu »

Denzil wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 10:30 pm There’s talk of ten year bans etc. Surely the evidence needs to be more than circumstantial for that. Then there’s his circumstantial evidence; what was the motive. Allegedly the amount won across all card bets for him was less than £100k which is not even a weeks salary for him. What would his cut be? 20%? Why would he fix bets for a couple of days wages.
Maybe it's not about making himself money but rather helping his mates out.

Back in the mid 90s I had a job in Canary Wharf for a premium phone line company.You know the ones that Talksport & the like use.

I'd be in there on my own at weekends & radio stations would ask some easy question then tell you to phone in (at 33p a minute) to leave the answer. I was the one listening to the answers then sending a fax off to the radio station with half a dozen 'winners' on it. I would add one of my mates or family & next to their name I would type "This one sounds fun". Without fail the radio station would phone them first & my lot won all sorts of prizes from holidays to thousand quid shopping vouchers etc.

I was on pretty crappy money there but didn't take a penny from my mates. Just did it for the laugh. Well, maybe I got bought a couple of beers.
Viv Stanshall
Posts: 1496
Joined: Tue Jun 06, 2023 7:40 am
Has liked: 226 likes
Total likes: 477 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Viv Stanshall »

I have informed the authorities of this admission of guilt and no doubt you will be receiving a visit from the FBI very shortly.
User avatar
Wilko1304
Posts: 10065
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 11:36 pm
Location: "Once you start complicating things the end result is less inflatables"
Has liked: 1628 likes
Total likes: 3411 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by Wilko1304 »

Diogenes wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 10:05 pm Yes he would. If the evidence was unequivocal he wouldn't have a leg to stand on, let alone deny the charges. Sure you need due process, but that would only be what the repercussions are.
If I remember correctly, they charged him when they did because they basically had to do it before a certain date or drop it. As such, whilst I'm not sure he would have been necessarily banned already, I think he would have been charged much earlier if they were entirely sure, evidence was unequivocal etc.
User avatar
davids cross
Uncle David
Posts: 27426
Joined: Wed Sep 28, 2005 10:20 pm
Has liked: 792 likes
Total likes: 1548 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by davids cross »

brooking_1980 wrote: Sun Jun 16, 2024 4:16 pm Its a bunch of strange bets, open account, 1st thing they do is yellow card on Paqueta......they win, so they are trying to find a connection from Paqueta to the people placing the bet.

And,

The vast majority of these people live on......wait for it...

Paqueta Island... :winker: ..Which is also the size of a very small postage stamp.

Circumstantial evidence is absolutely fine, both in criminal law and sporting investigations ...and betting patterns.

It's the strength of the circumstantial evidence that is important. Circumstantial evidence is not a defence. Otherwise the prisons would be half empty. Its often the most powerful evidence.....because it relies on more than just one piece of evidence.
User avatar
SammyLeeWasOffside
Posts: 22446
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 9:31 am
Has liked: 416 likes
Total likes: 1315 likes

Re: ✍️ Welcome Lucas Paquetá - Our Brazilian Magnifico

Post by SammyLeeWasOffside »

Diogenes wrote: Tue Jun 18, 2024 10:05 pm Yes he would. If the evidence was unequivocal he wouldn't have a leg to stand on, let alone deny the charges. Sure you need due process, but that would only be what the repercussions are.
If he had already admitted the charges then if course he would be banned. If the hasn't then no matter the evidence he wouldn't be at this stage.
Post Reply