The Football Association has been strongly criticised by the regulatory commission that cleared Lucas Paquet\u00e1 of spot-fixing charges over its failure to provide an independent assessment of the betting data on the West Ham player receiving yellow cards.<\/p>\n
A 314-page report by the commission that heard Paquet\u00e1\u2019s case was published on Wednesday and makes damning reading for the FA, with its evidence criticised for containing \u201can obvious flaw, namely the lack of an independent assessment of the data\u201d.<\/p>\n
Nick De Marco KC, who represented Paquet\u00e1, wrote on X that the report was \u201cunderstood to be the longest sports-related judgment ever issued in the world, a reflection of how serious the case was, and the amount of evidence deployed in the biggest case in the FA\u2019s history\u201d.<\/p>\n
The FA charged Paquet\u00e1 with four counts of spot-fixing in May 2024<\/a> after a 10-month investigation into bookings he received in four Premier League matches. Its case centred on connections between the Brazilian and 27 of the 253 individuals who placed apparently suspicious bets on him to be booked in one or more of the four games, with combined bets of \u00a347,000 bringing a profit of \u00a3167,000.<\/p>\n The commission concluded there was no evidence of corruption and that the unusual betting patterns were more likely explained by the \u201crather random passing of \u2018hot tips\u2019 or perceived \u2018inside information\u2019 within Brazil than a spot-fix\u201d.<\/p>\n The three-person panel accepted Paquet\u00e1\u2019s testimony that there was frequently talk of betting, including on the player himself, among his family and friends, and that it would defy logic for individuals involved in a spot-fix to be so \u201cloose\u201d with relevant information and tips. It also noted that the FA failed to find any mention of the case or any discussion of betting on two mobile phones belonging to Paquet\u00e1 which it seized as evidence.<\/p>\n Lucas Paquet\u00e1 (centre) training with Brazil this week ahead their World Cup qualifiers. Photograph: Ricardo Moraes\/Reuters<\/p>\n The commission\u2019s report is particularly damning of the FA betting integrity investigator, Tom Astley, who was also the governing body\u2019s chief witness. The failure to produce an independent assessment of the betting data is described as \u201csurprising\u201d and the commission noted that the FA appeared to contradict the statements of its main witness.<\/p>\n The FA\u2019s main prosecutor, Jonathan Laidlaw KC, disagreed with Astley\u2019s description of the betting patterns as \u201chighly orchestrated\u201d, a difference of interpretation the commission concluded was concerning. \u201cThe clear appearance given to the commission was that the FA was not altogether certain what case it was presenting against the player,\u201d it said.<\/p>\n The commission reviewed bet-by-bet data for 33 individuals and concluded there was no evidence of a spot-fix. The report notes that the bettors did not place the maximum stake permitted, which would be expected if there were a spot-fix, and the fluctuating number of bets on each of the four matches was also interpreted as the bettors acting on tips rather than attempting a fix.<\/p>\n Paquet\u00e1\u2019s on-field performance was also analysed by the commission, with his former manager at West Ham, David Moyes, and the former referee Mark Clattenburg giving evidence on his behalf. Clattenburg described Paquet\u00e1\u2019s on-field actions during the four matches as \u201centirely within the normal range of actions for this player\u201d, and the defence team also produced evidence showing that the rate at which he received yellow cards remained consistent before, during and after the games in question, which took place in the 2022-23 season and at the start of the 2023-24 campaign.<\/p>\n The commission also questioned the independence of the FA\u2019s expert witness on performance, Jack Johnson of Stats Perform Integrity Services, because it has a commercial relationship with the governing body. Johnson was accused of \u201cconfirmation bias\u201d for failing to consider Paquet\u00e1\u2019s conduct in isolation from what he had been told about suspicious betting.<\/p>\n skip past newsletter promotion<\/a><\/p>\n Sign up to Football Daily<\/p>\n Kick off your evenings with the Guardian’s take on the world of football<\/p>\n Privacy Notice: <\/strong>Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com<\/a> to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy<\/a>. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy<\/a> and Terms of Service<\/a> apply.<\/p>\n after newsletter promotion<\/p>\n Lucas Paquet\u00e1, celebrating during West Ham\u2019s win over Nottingham Forest, has been one of the club\u2019s key players during his time under investigation. Photograph: Dan Istitene\/Getty Images<\/p>\n