Imagine for a minute that the player you have built your team around, the ‘playmaker’ and creative maestro of the team suddenly gets slapped with a ten – year ban for illegal betting. However much we as fans want to stay in denial or wax lyrical about lack of evidence, nobody can be sure about Lucas Paquetá’s West Ham United future. Even if, as I sincerely hope, he escapes a ban, it is quite probable that Manchester City will be back next summer, coughing up the £85 million to activate his release clause. I’ll get shouted down as being negative, for sure. Stay in denial if you wish.
At best, West Ham may recoup his transfer fee and a healthy profit. At worst, we will not only have a gaping hole in our midfield but there’ll be a massive gap in the financial ‘assets’ column of next year’s accounts, with a hitherto-£85 million player suddenly worth zero.
So both Lopetegui and Sullivan have a Paquetá-shaped headache right now. In addition, the head coach faces further challenges with Edson Alvarez unfit until after the International break at best and a midfield that looks far from the finished article. Andy Irving seems to have been designated a ‘squad’ player as he didn’t make it onto the pitch last weekend with Soucek, Ward Prowse, Rodriguez plus Alvarez when fit ahead of him in the queue. Looks likely he’ll be off then.
Carlos Soler from his Valencia days | A prudent piece of planning by Lopetegui
Carlos Soler as a midfield playmaker, an attacking option to partner Alvarez or Rodriguez, seems a sensible ‘plan B’ to move to if Paquetá parts company with West Ham mid- way through, or at the end of, this season. And Lopetegui’s desire to have ‘two players for each position’ will play a part in driving forward the acquisition of another attacking midfielder.
Remember the scouting report I referred to yesterday: “His preferred role is as an attacking midfielder, as this allows him plenty of opportunities to bring the ball forward and fashion chances for his teammates.” Indeed, if you search YouTube there are old videos from his time at Valencia entitled ‘Carlos Soler-The Playmaker’.
Competition within the Squad
And bear this in mind: If Paquetá for some reason stays at London Stadium – how much better to have another creative midfielder pushing him for a place every game. Nobody is ‘undroppable’ and some of Paq-mans performances of late have been distinctly underwhelming. The yellow cards (lucky he wasn’t sent off, to be honest) for frequent niggly fouls against Aston Villa are testimony to his frustration. The Head Coach needs to be able to bench him if he underperforms with a viable replacement ready to go. Remember our season last year after New ~Year when Lucas picked up the injury? We were seemingly unable to create opportunities and score for the months that he was sidelined.
Exits
Whichever departures follow, and that will depend on your own viewpoints regarding Soucek, Ward Prowse, Cornet (who?) and Irving, it’s clear that one or two will be surplus to requirements both financially and squad-wise, if Soler does sign on what we expect to be a Todibo-style loan-to-buy.
Not only a great addition to The Hammers’ midfield now, but sensible insurance against one of our Crown Jewels being gone by next summer. Very shrewd business.
Bang on Martin, totally agree.
Well expressed, Martin. Judging by his display on Saturday, we will be lucky if Paqueta plays many games for us; or attracts much of a transfer fee !
‘ there’ll be a massive gap in the financial ‘assets’ column of next year’s accounts, with a hitherto-£85 million player suddenly worth zero.’
Not exactly true. He was signed for 36.5 million nearly exactly two years ago. There were a bunch of add ons that took the deal to 50 million. We will have paid at least two installments so on the books (the balance sheet) he will have a value of around 20 million. That is the amount we would write off if he was banned for any length of time.
The eighty five is an opportunity loss, what we thought we might get for him. However given Manchester City’s potential for financial restrictions and perhaps even a transfer ban that ship may already have sailed. Personally I’m not sure that if and when he is cleared there is anyone else out there willing to bid that amount.
So yes the club does take a financial hit if he is banned and not an insignificant one. But placing financial assets and 85 million in the same sentence is not correct. The loss might at least provide some relief on tax and of course the removal of his wages would have benefits from a PSR point of view. Still not great, but better than the article suggests.
He obviously has his mind on other things. I was expecting him to miss the penalty. He is just not the best player in the squad at the moment.
Not sure but would have thought there would be an insurance paid to cover loss of player but don’t know if this situation would be covered ?
It’s not possible to cover against illegal activities which spot fixing is if he were to be convicted of it, so no it’s not insured.
A whole can of worms would open up though regarding breach of contract which it probably would be.
What also might be interesting is that if banned the resulting write off might mean West Ham broke PSR limits for the year, sort of ‘we’ve banned your player and now we are going to deduct points because now we’ve generated a loss for you’.
If it was not a lifetime ban – but one for a period of time, that would also create lots of potentially awkward issues. What if a ban took him into the last year of his contract (not impossible) then Paqueta would be free to negotiate a deal with a foreign club as a potential free agent. If the ban took him past the end of his contract then presumably West Ham no longer have his registration and again no money. Whatever the authorities do to Paqueta they need to also be aware of the impact on West Ham. There are not a huge number of precedents in these type of cases, something West Ham’s lawyers might make something of. This is going to be particularly true if the evidence is largely circumstantial and there is no smoking gun in Paqueta’s hand (or phone). Banning a player is one thing. Creating a situation where an innocent and impacted party (West Ham) has further action taken against them (points deduction) will have City lawyers rubbing their hands in glee. No wonder the decision is taking so long.
Funny i had a bet on him to get booked in the 31st minute against Villa
It’s not really worth discussing the What If’s. Paqueta’s future will be clearer when a final verdict is known..