The FA is under scrutiny for its handling of Lucas Paquetá’s spot-fixing case, with a report citing a lack of independent betting data analysis as a major flaw. Paquetá was cleared, but questions linger about the FA’s investigative process.
The Football Association (FA) is facing sharp criticism following the release of a regulatory commission's report that cleared West Ham's Lucas Paquetá of spot-fixing charges. The commission's 314-page report highlights a significant deficiency in the FA's approach, specifically the failure to provide an independent, expert assessment of betting data related to yellow cards received by the Brazilian midfielder.
The report, which details the proceedings of Paquetá's case, points to “an obvious flaw” in the FA’s evidence, noting the absence of an unbiased analysis of the betting data. This oversight has raised questions about the thoroughness and impartiality of the FA's investigation.
Nick De Marco KC, Paquetá’s legal representative, commented on the extensive nature of the report, stating on X (formerly Twitter) that it is “understood 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’s history.”
The FA initially charged Paquetá in May 2024 with four counts of spot-fixing, stemming from a 10-month investigation into bookings he received during four Premier League matches. The FA's case hinged on alleged connections between Paquetá and 27 individuals who placed suspicious bets on him receiving yellow cards in those games. These bets, totaling £47,000, yielded a profit of £167,000.
However, the commission ultimately concluded that there was no concrete evidence of corruption. Instead, they suggested that the unusual betting patterns were more likely the result of “rather random passing of ‘hot tips’ or perceived ‘inside information’ within Brazil than a spot-fix.”
The three-person panel presiding over the case accepted Paquetá’s testimony that discussions about betting, including on his own performance, were common among his family and friends. They also noted the illogical nature of those involved in a genuine spot-fix being so careless with sensitive information. Furthermore, the FA's inability to find any mention of the case or betting discussions on Paquetá’s seized mobile phones was a significant factor.
The commission was particularly critical of the FA’s betting integrity investigator, Tom Astley, who served as the governing body's chief witness. The report deemed the lack of an independent assessment of betting data as “surprising” and highlighted what appeared to be contradictions between the FA's stance and Astley's statements.
Jonathan Laidlaw KC, the FA’s main prosecutor, differed with Astley’s characterization of the betting patterns as “highly orchestrated,” a discrepancy that the commission found concerning. “The clear appearance given to the commission was that the FA was not altogether certain what case it was presenting against the player,” the report stated.
After reviewing bet-by-bet data for 33 individuals, the commission found no evidence of a spot-fix. The bettors’ failure to place maximum stakes, which would be expected in a spot-fixing scenario, and the fluctuating number of bets on each match, were interpreted as indicative of acting on tips rather than orchestrating a fix.
The commission also examined Paquetá’s on-field performance, with testimonies from his former West Ham manager, David Moyes, and former referee Mark Clattenburg. Clattenburg described Paquetá’s actions during the matches as “entirely within the normal range of actions for this player.” Evidence presented also showed that Paquetá’s rate of receiving yellow cards remained consistent before, during, and after the matches in question.
The independence of the FA’s expert witness on performance, Jack Johnson of Stats Perform Integrity Services, was also questioned due to the commercial relationship between the company and the FA. Johnson faced accusations of “confirmation bias” for not considering Paquetá’s conduct independently of the suspicious betting information.
As reported earlier, Paquetá faces a separate sanctions hearing for two lesser charges of failing to fully cooperate with the FA’s investigation. The commission noted its surprise that the FA declined to ask Paquetá any questions after he offered to answer them, despite the seriousness of the allegations.
In response to the report, the FA stated its commitment to upholding the integrity of football and conducting thorough investigations into alleged rule breaches, confirming it has no plans to appeal.
Alastair Campbell, a partner at Level and head of Paquetá’s legal team, asserted that the evidence proved Paquetá’s lack of interest in gambling and confirmed his integrity. He also stated that submissions are still being made regarding the non-cooperation charge, but, "in a case where his entire career was at risk, Lucas is unquestionably the successful party.”