While UEFA appears determined to make an example of Pedro Neto following his silly moment in Paris, Chelsea should point out a near-identical 2025 incident that suggests the Blues’ winger is being held to a standard that simply didn’t exist eleven months ago.
Pedro Neto has got himself in a spot of bother on a couple of occasions this season.
The red card against Arsenal has seen him suspended for a further game and fined £70k for his behaviour towards the referee after his dismissal.
Meanwhile, he’s currently being investigated by UEFA after the incident that saw him push a ball boy off his stool during the 5-2 loss to Paris Saint-Germain.
“Disciplinary proceedings have been opened against Chelsea player Pedro Lomba Neto for unsporting conduct, in accordance with Article 15(1)(a)(v) of the UEFA Disciplinary Regulations. UEFA’s disciplinary bodies will make a decision on this case in due course.”
Valentin Barco appears to be Liam Rosenior’s first Chelsea signing of the summer 👀
Thoughts?
Valentin Barco is very close to joining Chelsea
Photo by Sathire Kelpa/Eurasia Sport Images/Getty Images
Josip Stanisic escaped any kind of UEFA enforcement
Bayern Munich defender Josip Stanisic pushed an Inter Milan ball boy off his stool during a Champions League quarter-final in 2025 and escaped on-pitch punishment. As well as this, he was never hit with a retrospective suspension.
Much like Neto, Stanisic was incredibly apologetic. He admitted his actions were stupid immediately after the game, which historically helps soften UEFA’s disciplinary stance.
While Stanisic got away with it, Chelsea shouldn’t assume Neto will be as lucky. Unlike the Stanisic case, UEFA formally opened disciplinary proceedings against Neto.
Barcelona offer £50 million for Pedro Neto, what is your response?🤔
Pedro Neto linked with a move to Barcelona from Chelsea
Photo by Maciej Rogowski/Eurasia Sport Images/Getty Images
Chelsea needs to stand firm in front of UEFA
Chelsea must use the Josip Stanisic incident as the main talking point of their defence to expose the double standards currently being applied by UEFA.
As previously mentioned, the fact that Stanisic escaped an on-pitch booking and, crucially, UEFA declined to open a formal investigation or issue a retrospective ban, gives Chelsea scope to argue.
By contrast, the speed with which UEFA has charged Pedro Neto under Article 15(1)(a)(v) suggests a slight escalation that ignores recent precedent. This could be due to the sheer number of eyes that were on such a high-profile game, with UEFA possibly wanting to set a good example.
Consistency is the bedrock of fair discipline, and Chelsea must demand that Neto be afforded the same leniency that saw a rival player walk free.
Join Our Newsletter
Receive a digest of our best Chelsea content each week direct to your mailbox