Official: FC Barcelona charged with Corruption over payments to former referees chief | UEFA open investigation

kouroux said:
It will still be very difficult to prove in court that Barca are guilty of corrupting the referees.
Click to expand...

It is not hard at all.

All they need to prove is that Negreira promoted/relegated referees between divisions based on their calls vs Barcelona and Real Madrid.

For example: In the 2017/2018 season, Suarez clearly fouled Varane in a build up to a Messi goal. The fourth official (Escudero Marín) told the referee (Alejandro Hernández Hernández), or more so shouted, "It's a Suarez foul! It's a Suarez foul" in the communication system but the referee ignored him. It was randomly caught on camera and created a media storm. The fourth official, Escudero Marín, was relegated to the third division (from the Segunda where he was a full on referee), his 7 years progress through the ranks was stopped, and he retired.
 
Last edited:
Dansk said:
If their entire golden era is borne on the back of bribing the refs to help them win, is it really so historically prestigious? It also begs the question of what might have gone on in the past. Should we assume that they were squeaky clean through the murky 80s and 90s, only to suddenly opt to start cheating once they had built the best squad in the history of the sport? While I obviously have no proof of it, I wager this sort of thing has been going on for a long time, we just don't have evidence (yet) from before this particular sequence of bribes.

It's a good thing that our two CL finals against them weren't decided by controversial refereering calls or I'd have to care a whole lot more about this stuff. If they'd won through dodgy calls, I wouldn't be able to help myself from going full freelance detective. Thankfully, I can just sit back and wait to hear how they'll be punished for buying La Liga.

Someone on Reddit posted this:


It shows the net positive/negative of red cards for/against throughout the years in question. Barcelona are so insanely far ahead of everyone else that no amount of "but they had Messi and Neymar!!!" can come even remotely close to explaining it. They're at a +77 balance over the course of that decade and a half. That means their opponents have seen red seventy-seven more times than they have. And what do you know, the two teams with the worst record: Barcelona's two rivals, Real Madrid and Espanyol.
Click to expand...

Feck those cheating bastard. I hope they get stripped of every trophies they have won during those period, and relegate to the 3rd division next season.
 
@FreckBarca good point about the sponsorship.
What global brand would want to be associated with a load of cheats.
With that said did juve suffer in that regard?
Perhaps I’m being a bit naive in thinking it would impact them at all. Certainly not a good look though when pitching to prospective sponsors.
 
cyberman said:
It doesn’t have to be corrupting referees just intent to gain an advantage.
it’s not as if Barca are this one entity, many managers and personnel have passed through that club. It’s not as if they can shut up shop and keep one story straight.
Click to expand...
Same burden of proof applies no ? It's very hard to prove without any doubt
 
kouroux said:
Same burden of proof applies no ? It's very hard to prove without any doubt
Click to expand...

Surely depends what the offense is? For instance if the corruption charge is due to illegally paying a referee, which they are quite clearly guilty of. They can’t prove it was for legal means, so therefore it becomes an illegal payment since there is no good or legitimate reason. Obviously depends on the rules/laws of course.

Spanish courts proved with the blood bag incident they are not above some dubious protections of Spanish interests though.
 
kouroux said:
I'm very skeptical by nature, I think it's easier for Barca to "justify" those payments over the years than proving they used that money to corrupt referees.
Click to expand...

It depends on where you set the burden of proof for "justify."

If just showing a two-page Word document is enough then sure.
 
Paying the guy is not a crime in and of itself. It's a breach of rules and a wild ethics violation, but that's for a civil court of sport to punish and they can't be charged by it due to the prescription period having expired
 
kouroux said:
Same burden of proof applies no ? It's very hard to prove without any doubt
Click to expand...

You have to prove without reasonable doubt, not without any doubt.

Suppose the police find a random person's body with 60 stab wounds in my living room.

I'm in serious trouble even if there is no murder weapon.
 
Are you sure about all this? It would imply they could just continue to pay the refs as long as they got a good cover story for it.
 
giorno said:
Paying the guy is not a crime in and of itself. It's a breach of rules and a wild ethics violation, but that's for a civil court of sport to punish and they can't be charged by it due to the prescription period having expired
Click to expand...
The expiration period does not apply if there is criminal wrong doing, am I correct?
 
giorno said:
I believe so, but first they have to be convicted of a crime
Click to expand...
I‘m convinced, I think there is enough to start huge inquiries. Paying the boss of referees 7 million has to be a crime.
 
NLunited said:
I‘m convinced, I think there is enough to start huge inquiries. Paying the boss of referees 7 million has to be a crime.
Click to expand...
It isn't. It's a crime only if the court decides those payments were irregular and meant for sporting fraud or a similar crime. Until then, they're innocent
 
NLunited said:
The expiration period does not apply if there is criminal wrong doing, am I correct?
Click to expand...
The offence is corruption in business in the field of sport for "the directors, administrators, employees or collaborators of a sports entity" and also for "sportsmen and women, referees or judges" (Negreira) who intend to "deliberately and fraudulently predetermine or alter the result of a sporting event, meeting or competition of special economic or sporting relevance".
I understand that they can act against Laporta, but not against the previous ones, as this penal code dates from 2010 and not against Barcelona as a club.
The sports law is no longer in force as the payments ended in 2018 and has already expired (3 years).
Maybe I'm wrong but it seems that only Rosell and Laporta would pay, with disqualifications or light prison sentences.
 
giorno said:
It isn't. It's a crime only if the court decides those payments were irregular and meant for sporting fraud or a similar crime. Until then, they're innocent
Click to expand...
Yes of course but they are already making excuses which amounts to an admission of guilt.
 
Are any of the Pep bros at City at Barcelona at the time?
 
Libertad digital publishes Negreira's referee reports.
An absolute joke, there are parts that look like copy paste from google and serious spelling mistakes as the article says.
 
Iker Quesadillas said:
You have to prove without reasonable doubt, not without any doubt.

Suppose the police find a random person's body with 60 stab wounds in my living room.

I'm in serious trouble even if there is no murder weapon.
Click to expand...
Yeah but with a good lawyer (if you're super rich that is), you can get away with it. There have been too many blatant cases in the history of mankind which have led to feck all in terms of prosecution
 
giorno said:
It isn't. It's a crime only if the court decides those payments were irregular and meant for sporting fraud or a similar crime. Until then, they're innocent
Click to expand...
I’m sure they don’t have to prove it was for corruption but for Barcelona not being able to explain what they were for? If Barca can’t explain it then it’s a bribe. If it were that high of a bar then bribes would be nearly impossible to prove?
 
whitbyviking said:
Surely depends what the offense is? For instance if the corruption charge is due to illegally paying a referee, which they are quite clearly guilty of. They can’t prove it was for legal means, so therefore it becomes an illegal payment since there is no good or legitimate reason. Obviously depends on the rules/laws of course.

Spanish courts proved with the blood bag incident they are not above some dubious protections of Spanish interests though.
Click to expand...
Do you feel that all the involved parties in that incident paid ? I don't think so
 
cyberman said:
I’m sure they don’t have to prove it was for corruption but for Barcelona not being able to explain what they were for? If Barca can’t explain it then it’s a bribe. If it were that high of a bar then bribes would be nearly impossible to prove?
Click to expand...

The prosecutor's office wants Luis Enrique and Ernesto Valverde to testify.

Presumably they want to establish that the referee reports were not actually used by anyone.
 
kouroux said:
I'm very skeptical by nature, I think it's easier for Barca to "justify" those payments over the years than proving they used that money to corrupt referees.
They would need a lot of corroboration and I think it would take more than 1 ref to speak about it. A corruption of that level must involve a lot of referees
Click to expand...
At work, if I receive money where there is conflict of interest, I have to prove that money didn't effect my decision making rather than company needing to prove it swayed my decisions. I would think the same logic would apply if UEFA or FIFA get involved.
 
Gottabekiddingme said:
It is not hard at all.

All they need to prove is that Negreira promoted/relegated referees between divisions based on their calls vs Barcelona and Real Madrid.

For example: In the 2017/2018 season, Suarez clearly fouled Varane in a build up to a Messi goal. The fourth official (Escudero Marín) told the referee (Alejandro Hernández Hernández), or more so shouted, "It's a Suarez foul! It's a Suarez foul" in the communication system but the referee ignored him. It was randomly caught on camera and created a media storm. The fourth official, Escudero Marín, was relegated to the third division (from the Segunda where he was a full on referee), his 7 years progress through the ranks was stopped, and he retired.
Click to expand...
Do you have articles or links which cover the example. That is damning.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
At work, if I receive money where there is conflict of interest, I have to prove that money didn't effect my decision making rather than company needing to prove it swayed my decisions. I would think the same logic would apply if UEFA or FIFA get involved.
Click to expand...
I'm not a legal expert by any stretch of the imagination. I know I'd be suspended without question and eventually fired.
I have no idea if the same logic applies in this case
 
cyberman said:
I’m sure they don’t have to prove it was for corruption but for Barcelona not being able to explain what they were for? If Barca can’t explain it then it’s a bribe. If it were that high of a bar then bribes would be nearly impossible to prove?
Click to expand...
Bribes are really difficult to prove as a matter of fact. Burden here should be on the prosecution to prove it was a bribe, not on barcelona to prove it wasn't, afaik
 
giorno said:
It isn't. It's a crime only if the court decides those payments were irregular and meant for sporting fraud or a similar crime. Until then, they're innocent
Click to expand...

Is it normal to pay millions to the head of referees? Is there any honest, legitimate reason for doing that? Do other clubs do it?
 
Dansk said:
Is it normal to pay millions to the head of referees? Is there any honest, legitimate reason for doing that? Do other clubs do it?
Click to expand...
That's not how the law works. They say the payments were for a consultancy, and that's that. Burden is on the prosecution to prove otherwise. Paying Negreira is an ethics violation and a likely breach of RFEF rules, but that's not a criminal offence
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
Do you have articles or links which cover the example. That is damning.
Click to expand...

There are no articles because there was no context of Negreira. But looking back it does look very fishy.

There's a video on YouTube called The fourth referee, Hernández Hernández: "It's Suarez's fault, it's Suarez's fault". Search for it & you'll see.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
At work, if I receive money where there is conflict of interest, I have to prove that money didn't effect my decision making rather than company needing to prove it swayed my decisions. I would think the same logic would apply if UEFA or FIFA get involved.
Click to expand...

Nope… football justice everywhere is a private agreement between clubs to keep proceedings fast and leagues going. Yet, when matters clearly overgrow its statute and football justice still goes ape (like in Calciopoli ), things escalate toward the ordinary justice and rightly so, considering that there are billion €€€ businesses at stake, not a mistimed tackle by Casemiro or an assistant coach insulting the referee.
 
Dr. StrangeHate said:
Do you have articles or links which cover the example. That is damning.
Click to expand...
Gottabekiddingme said:
There are no articles because there was no context of Negreira. But looking back it does look very fishy.

There's a video on YouTube called The fourth referee, Hernández Hernández: "It's Suarez's fault, it's Suarez's fault". Search for it & you'll see.
Click to expand...

 
Swear I went through a stage where nearly every match I saw Barcelona in against tough opposition in the champions leave the other team got a dubious red card.
 
Cropped image from some article doing the rounds on twitter about aytekin's brother winning 15 grand by betting on barcelona comeback against psg. I assume it's a deep fake.....
 
giorno said:
That's not how the law works. They say the payments were for a consultancy, and that's that. Burden is on the prosecution to prove otherwise. Paying Negreira is an ethics violation and a likely breach of RFEF rules, but that's not a criminal offence
Click to expand...

You are always relatively fair giorno, much appreciated
 
You must log in or register to reply here.