At the close of the first week of Lucas Paqueta’s spot-fixing trial, there has not yet been an answer to a career-defining question: was he merely a good bet for yellow cards or a sure thing?
So far, there has been no verdict. Nor have there been any overwhelming signs of which way it is going and whether there will indeed be a lifetime ban if he is found guilty of an offence he denies.
But a few tales have reached me about how Paqueta managed his existence in the early days of an important saga, once the asteroid came into view. They take us back to August 2023.
That’s when word arrived that the FA were looking into him and the Brazilian was taken into a room at West Ham‘s base at Rush Green, where a few of the particulars were laid out by a senior member of club staff.
It’s not clear if that was the very first Paqueta had heard of it, but that’s the assumption of the source who shared the recollection. In any case, there was apparently no panic from the player or much of any emotion at all.
Instead, word went round the training ground that he was entirely relaxed. A little detached, even. For better or worse, some staff associated those traits with him long before four yellow cards and suspicious betting patterns entered the conversation.
At the close of the first week of Lucas Paqueta’s spot-fixing trial, there has been no verdict
Paqueta is accused of getting himself deliberately booked in four different matches between November 2022 and August 2023
There was seemingly no panic or emotion from Paqueta when West Ham first informed him that the FA were looking into him
To the question of how he might have been expected to handle such immense stress, evidently not many there would be qualified to give a comprehensive answer.
By the account I’ve been given, he was never a loner at West Ham after his arrival in 2022, but nor was he a player overtly keen to assimilate with the group. Aside from Emerson, his closest friend at the club, Paqueta didn’t socialise with many team-mates in his first season or so, and that was a trigger for thoughts which can be common at a mid-range outfit.
The perception, outside of the squad at least, was of a man on a stepping stone. That he was passing through and in a bit of a hurry.
And, as we know, he very nearly did, all the way to Manchester City, but that £80million plan was quickly pulped once the investigation hit the open air.
Going back to my source, Paqueta’s mood turned when the collapse of that interest merged with ever-louder headlines from Brazil, where scrutiny around the case was growing.
He might not have seen West Ham as much more than a launchpad, but the Brazilian national team? That was in his heart. The idea that a problem in London could become a threat to his place over there made this even more real.
Exile never materialised, then or in the two years since, but he did grow tetchier, which was understandable in the circumstances. According to my source, he sulked away from one of David Moyes’s training sessions in those early weeks and then refused to go on a school visit.
Those are the community events which West Ham’s players attended most months. Initially, Paqueta would go if Emerson went with him, but after a time it became a harder sell altogether to a man trapped between the encroaching rock in the sky and a hard place on the ground; a man stuck at a club that was never meant to be his last. And now it might be.
There was a perception that Paqueta saw West Ham as a stepping stone, but a move to Manchester City collapsed
One source claims that Paqueta went on to sulk away from a training session and refused a school visit in the early weeks of the investigation
If there’s a purpose to this snapshot of a wider story, it’s to view the human dimension within one of the most troubling cases in the recent history of British football.
Same as an unresolved doping case, I have often thought what it must be like for the athlete in the middle of a crisis. The fear, the not knowing, and how much worse that would be if there is a genuine sense of injustice.
Because what if the charges are unfounded, as Paqueta insists? What if this is all smoke and no fire? What if those four bookings against Leicester, Aston Villa, Leeds and Bournemouth across 2022 and 2023 occurred in isolation to unusual betting patterns, many of which are said to have originated on a distant island of 3,500 people in Guanabara Bay, Brazil? What if it is a pure coincidence that friends and family on that island, his home island, Paqueta Island, are reported to have wagered with some accuracy on when he would be booked? What if there is truly no reason to read allegations in Brazil about his uncle, Bruno Tolentino, and let your mind wander about the latter’s involvement in a separate match-fixing hearing?
Then again, when I re-read those questions, the main instinct is to wait for the verdict before ordering any violins for Paqueta.
We can’t be certain about the strands of evidence on which the FA have built their case, but we can be confident they haven’t spent the last two years fingerpainting. They will be going in armed, as is Paqueta, who will be supported by testimony from Moyes.
That was the latest in a line of excellent exclusives on this topic by my colleague Kieran Gill, who broke this story at the outset. He reported on Thursday that Moyes is expected to verify that Paqueta was desperate not to play against Bournemouth on August 12, 2023, at the height of Manchester City’s interest.
It’s also said that Paqueta requested a substitution at the earliest opportunity, before going on to receive one of his four suspicious yellow cards for a handball in stoppage time. The defence’s inference is that he could not be part of a card conspiracy if he didn’t want to be on the pitch.
Paqueta’s uncle Bruno Tolentino (not pictured) is involved in a separate match-fixing hearing
In five of the past six seasons the midfielder has averaged more fouls per 90 minutes than any of his team-mates
If claims of a lifetime sanction hold true and he is found guilty, West Ham’s draw with Everton on March 15 could be his last dance
It’s one aspect of the Paqueta case. So too is betting data, which is understood to demonstrate how he draws a disproportionate number of wagers on his yellow cards because of his disciplinary record.
That might well be true in isolation — from a quick trawl of the figures, I can see that in five of the past six seasons, spanning his spells at AC Milan, Lyon and West Ham, he has averaged more fouls per 90 minutes than any of his team-mates. After nine years as a professional, he has been booked 41 times.
Paqueta’s hope will be that he can convince the panel on the ‘balance of probabilities’ that those threads, among others, outweigh whatever links are made to the bets of those in his orbit. That they can weave into a verdict of innocence over innuendo. We’ll see.
If I have sympathy for him at this juncture, it is in sharing the view of West Ham that this case should be tried ‘beyond reasonable doubt’, given he could be banned for life if found guilty and the higher burden of proof seems warranted.
Maybe the FA have it, irrespective of the legal standard required. Perhaps they don’t. But an answer is coming, and if it arrives before the end of this month, and it is one of guilt, we won’t see the Brazilian against Wolves on April 1.
Possibly, if the claims of a lifetime sanction hold true in that eventuality, we won’t see him again, leaving Everton 1 West Ham 1 on March 15 as his last dance.
As it happens, he was subbed off after 82 minutes that afternoon, having just been booked. The next few weeks might tell us if that was a fitting end.
