Like most others, I was stunned to learn the small numerical value of the bets for which West Ham midfielder Lucas Paqueta is being charged with misconduct.
Given the grand scale of the FA’s investigation—spanning 18 months—I had feared the worst. Add to that the leaks suggesting the Football Association would push for a lifetime ban, and it led me to question whether West Ham’s Brazilian playmaker was part of some kind of international betting cartel siphoning millions from bookmakers.
It was, after all, West Ham’s own sponsor Betway that flagged the suspicious betting patterns, all centred around yellow cards Paqueta received during Irons matches.
Surely, I thought, this must involve serious money. So imagine my—and everyone else’s—surprise when the actual betting amounts were revealed yesterday.
I know Martin shared his thoughts in an earlier article, but I’m honestly gobsmacked by the revelations that the bets were in fact a series of small punts, ranging from just £7 to a maximum of £400.
Most of the stakes are understood to be well under £100. Half of the bets were for less than £50, and one particular £30 wager was even flagged as ‘unusually large’.
The entire situation seems to have gone from serious to absurd. It’s now clear why Lucas Paqueta’s legal team have remained so confident. One has to wonder why the FA have poured so much time and effort into investigating what amounts to relatively irrelevant sums of money.
I know plenty of people who would happily put more than a tenner on Edson Álvarez to be booked—mainly because it’s easy money most weeks. What we’re not privy to is whether these bets were only placed on yellow cards. If they also included Paqueta to score or have shots on target, I genuinely can’t see much of a case to answer—unless new evidence comes to light.
Most importantly, I find it unfathomable that a player could face a lifetime ban over a handful of bets for comparatively small amounts
