West Ham: Lucas Paqueta warning over spot-fixing probe conduct

In its written reasons, external for the decision published on Friday, the independent commission said it “accepted that the player was acting on advice at all times but, nevertheless, as a participant he has an obligation to respect and abide by the regulations”.

It said the “starting point for sanction was a financial penalty”, however, it added that several mitigating factors led it to take the decision not to impose a fine.

Among them was Paqueta’s “limited knowledge of English” and it being “fanciful” to expect the player, with no legal training, to do anything other than follow the advice of the leading counsel appointed by his club.

The commission observed that the FA was “apparently not interested in what the player had to say at the second interview when he offered to answer questions arising from the disclosure which had taken place after the first interview”.

It added: “In any event, the player provided answers to the matters raised by the FA by his provision of a witness statement on 15 December 2023, thus in reality complying with the request for information. He had previously volunteered the production of his mobile devices for interrogation.

“Significantly, this was all prior to charges being brought and did not ultimately frustrate the investigation. No evidence of prejudice has been advanced by the FA.”

Also taken into account were the “weighty” legal fees Paqueta had encountered during the case and the “mental stress” suffered by the player because of the “extremely serious” nature of the allegations against him.

“We recognise that an element of the mental stress suffered by the player included his realisation that, had the [spot-fixing] charges been found proved, his footballing career would almost certainly have come to an end,” said the commission.