![\"Premier](\"https:\/\/readwrite.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/09\/Premier-League-star-Lucas-Paqueta-considers-suing-FA-after-spot-fixing-case-collapse-300x200.png\")
<\/div>\nWest Ham United midfielder Lucas Paqueta<\/a> is thinking about taking legal action against the Football Association (FA) after being cleared of spot fixing charges<\/a>. His legal team is said to be looking at all possible options after an independent commission gave a harsh assessment of the FA’s case.<\/p>\n The 28-year-old Brazilian had been accused of four counts of deliberately picking up yellow cards to influence betting markets. The FA alleged that Paqueta \u201cintentionally sought to receive a card from the referee for the improper purpose of affecting the betting market in order for one or more persons to profit from betting\u201d in matches against Leicester City, Aston Villa, Leeds United and Bournemouth between November 2022 and August 2023. Manchester City had shown interest in signing Paqueta for \u00a380 million before the charges came up.<\/p>\n He denied any wrongdoing and was fully cleared in July 2025. Written reasons<\/a> released on Wednesday (September 3), reveal how the FA put its case together and explain why the commission decided to reject it.<\/p>\n At the heart of the FA’s case was betting activity flagged by the International Betting Integrity Association. However, the commission criticized the FA for leaning too heavily on its own investigator instead of bringing in an independent betting expert.<\/p>\n \u201cFrom the Commission\u2019s perspective the evidence presented by The FA on the betting data had an obvious flaw, namely the lack of an independent expert assessment of that data. That The FA chose to advance the most important element of its case without any such independent expert assessment of it was, in the Commission’s view, surprising.\u201d – The FA vs Lucas Paqueta<\/p>\n<\/div>\n \u201cOn what The FA have accepted was the most important element of its case, it simply did not call independent expert evidence,\u201d the report stated.<\/p>\n \u201cAccordingly, whilst not Mr Astley’s fault, as he was doing what he had been directed to do, in circumstances where it was clearly and openly accepted by The FA that Mr Astley was not an independent expert, from the Commission\u2019s perspective the evidence presented by The FA on the betting data had an obvious flaw, namely the lack of an independent expert assessment of that data.\u201d<\/p>\n The panel added that there were other explanations for the betting activity that were just as believable: \u201cThe betting patterns may have emerged from a rather random passing of perceived \u2018hot tips\u2019 or perceived \u2018inside information\u2019 within Brazil as much as they may have emerged from a spot-fix.\u201d<\/p>\n The commission also slammed the FA\u2019s use of performance evidence, which it said suffered from \u201cconfirmation bias.\u201d It noted that incidents on the pitch were \u201cinterpreted in a manner that assumed a guilty explanation when in reality they were at least equally consistent with normal football actions.\u201d<\/p>\n The FA’s case also weakened when phone data analysis, once a key part of their argument, was dismissed after their own experts agreed with the opposing view put forward by Paqueta’s independent analyst. \u201cThe FA accept that this evidence\u2026 no longer has the evidential value or weight that The FA originally considered it to have,\u201d the commission recorded.<\/p>\n In the end, the panel concluded that the FA had not met the standard of proof needed to support the charges: \u201cThe burden remains on The FA throughout to prove the case on the balance of probabilities\u2026 We unanimously conclude that The FA cannot discharge the burden upon it.\u201d<\/p>\n FA v Lucas Paquet\u00e1 \u2013 written reasons published: https:\/\/t.co\/sVhXQOyvJh<\/a><\/p>\n The independent Regulatory Commission\u2019s written reasons in the Paquet\u00e1 case have now been published. <\/p>\n Running to over 300 pages, the decision is understood to be the longest sports-related judgment ever\u2026 pic.twitter.com\/NSIGmpOagD<\/a><\/p>\n — Nick De Marco KC (@nickdemarco_) September 3, 2025<\/a><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n For Paqueta, the decision is a huge relief after spending more than a year under suspicion. His lawyers are now deciding on their next move, with sources telling BBC Sport<\/a> that they are looking at all options, including possible legal action against the FA for the damage caused by the accusations.<\/p>\n Representing the player, Nick De Marco KC, wrote on X: “Running to over 300 pages, the decision is understood to be the longest sports-related judgment ever issued in the world \u2013 a reflection of how serious the case was, the amount of evidence deployed in what was the biggest case in The FA’s history, and one of the most momentous in my own career as a sports lawyer.”<\/p>\n Featured image: Egghead06 \/ CC. Share Alike 4.0 International<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n The post Premier League star Lucas Paqueta ‘considers suing FA’ after spot fixing case collapse<\/a> appeared first on ReadWrite<\/a>.<\/p>\n‘Lack of an independent expert assessment’<\/span><\/h2>\n
Paqueta may be thinking of taking legal action against the FA<\/span><\/h2>\n
\n