Lucas Paquetá’s dismissal for two yellow cards received for dissent in quick succession highlighted the authority referees must maintain when players repeatedly challenge decisions. Whatever the Brazilian midfielder’s grievances with officiating, the referee’s willingness to enforce discipline sent clear messages about acceptable behavior standards.
Dissent undermines referees’ authority and sets poor examples for players at all levels. When professionals openly challenge and argue with officials, it normalizes this behavior, encouraging similar conduct throughout football. Referees must maintain standards by punishing dissent appropriately, even when this means dismissing influential players.
The quickness of Paquetá’s second booking suggested particularly egregious behavior following his initial warning. Players who continue dissenting immediately after receiving yellow cards demonstrate either poor emotional control or deliberate disrespect for authority. Either way, the second booking becomes necessary to maintain standards.
For West Ham, Paquetá’s indiscipline proved costly, reducing them to ten men when still theoretically capable of salvaging something from the match. The dismissal highlighted the individual’s responsibility to maintain composure for teammates’ benefit. His failure to do so left colleagues facing impossible tasks.
The incident raises broader questions about player conduct and referee authority. Football’s culture around dissent has become increasingly problematic, with constant arguing and challenging becoming normalized. Referees enforcing discipline through bookings and dismissals represents necessary correction to this culture. Paquetá’s double booking, while seemingly harsh, demonstrates that some behaviors cross lines requiring punishment. Players must adapt to these standards or face consequences that hurt their teams as well as themselves.