West Ham Between a Rock and a Hard Place

Image for West Ham Between a Rock and a Hard Place

West Ham‘s transfer plans are in tatters. Lucas Paqueta‘s mammoth £85 million move to Manchester City has stalled due to FA betting charges. This unexpected turn of events leaves West Ham with a tricky decision: cash in on a risky buyer or wait for an uncertain resolution.

Al Nassr’s reported interest in Paqueta offers a potential solution. Money isn’t a problem for the Saudi club, and they could meet the release clause. However, their willingness is hampered by the FA charges.

Selling Paqueta now would solve West Ham’s financial woes. The £85 million windfall could be used to bolster the squad in other areas. But there’s a risk. What if Paqueta is eventually cleared? West Ham would have lost a valuable player for no reason.

Waiting for the FA verdict is also a gamble. It could take months, hindering West Ham’s ability to make other transfers. And even if cleared, will City’s interest return?

The ideal scenario would be Paqueta’s name being cleared, allowing City to revive their interest. This would give West Ham the best of both worlds: a hefty transfer fee and keeping their star player.

West Ham’s decision hinges on their risk tolerance. Do they prioritise immediate financial security and gamble on Paqueta’s future? Or do they wait for clarity, potentially missing out on a windfall and hindering their transfer plans? There’s no easy answer, and the Irons will need to weigh all their options carefully before making a decision.

Share this article


  • Phil McDonald says:

    Slow news day? Nothing new to see here. Walk away from the keyboard fella.

    • rollercoaster hammer says:

      why don’t you mate? do you know what a “thinkpiece” is? (waits) you don’t, so…it’s an article written to promote dialogue about a certain state of affairs. still with me? ok, so the comments section here is for that specific reason. use it to express your opinions on the matter, or don’t. didn’t get what you wanted off someone for free? something that you couldn’t do if you tried (which you wont)? get away from the keyboard fella. too many spoilt children on here lately

      • Phil McDonald says:

        A thinkpiece requires thought sonny. Regurgitated twaddle purely for clicks is NOT it.

  • Trevsheadwonthecup says:

    What financial woes . West ham are one of the better off clubs under both FFP and PSR . Ludicrous article.

    • Ess_Bee says:

      That, and the Hammers are supposed to have got the house in order regarding financial stability.

  • Stubbo says:

    If they’ve got a buyer, we were going to sell anyway, and he wants to go…then why not sell? Doesn’t matter to us if the 85m comes from Saudi or City surely? Is a no brainer (and actually mitigates the risk and passes it onto them).

    • Superboom says:

      Yeah i was a bit confused as to what the difference is between selling to city or Saudi if the cash is there surely it doesn’t matter who it is

  • Hammerpete6 says:

    As the article says, the Saudis need some assurance of clearance from guilt, but I agree, what’s the difference to us if it’s City or abroad? The worst situation is the limbo.

  • Matt Palmer says:

    If we got bid half his release clause we would have to sell him as I think the chances of him being cleared are very low and best case we cancel his contract and lower the wage bill

Comments are closed.