Former referee Iturralde Gonzalez says UEFA statement adds nothing to Barcelona’s Negreira case

Former Spanish international referee Eduardo Iturralde Gonzalez has dismissed Real Madrid’s latest actions in the Negreira case as “strange”, saying a recent UEFA statement contains no new evidence against Barcelona.

Speaking on the Spanish radio programme El Larguero on Cadena SER, Iturralde Gonzalez commented on the latest developments, including the exchange of statements and the additional documents Real Madrid has submitted to UEFA concerning the Catalan club.

He played down the significance of UEFA’s announcement, describing it as a procedural step rather than an indication of fresh action.

“As UEFA’s own statement confirms, this is simply an announcement that they have submitted additional information in a case they have been examining since 2023,” he said.

“This statement adds nothing else.”

The former referee also addressed the central issue in the case: whether payments linked to former refereeing official Jose Maria Enriquez Negreira influenced match officials.

He said the judicial investigation, which has continued for three years, had not established any such influence.

“For three years, the Guardia Civil has not proved, and will not prove, that there was any influence on any referee,” Iturralde Gonzalez said.

“In other words, if there was no influence on any referee, there is no sporting corruption.”

Criticism of Real Madrid’s approach

Iturralde Gonzalez also criticised Real Madrid’s position, pointing to what he described as a contradiction in the club’s strategy.

“If there are 50,000 pages that implicitly prove sporting corruption, as some people claim, what you have to do is submit them to the competent court, not to UEFA,” he said.

He questioned why Real Madrid was asking UEFA to reach a decision quickly while the proceedings in Spain continued to take so long.

“It is strange that Real Madrid asks UEFA, in its latest statement, to decide the case as quickly as possible, while in Spain they are taking a long time to rule on it because the extensions requested by Real Madrid itself only prolong the Negreira case,” he said.

“It is strange that they are extending it when there are no sporting consequences.”

Why has UEFA held back?

The programme also examined UEFA’s cautious approach to the case.

Journalist Albert Llimos said UEFA regulations clearly allow the organisation to declare a club ineligible for European competitions for one season if it has been involved in manipulating or influencing match results.

He added that the regulations allow UEFA to make such a decision without waiting for a ruling from the Spanish courts.

Journalist Jordi Marti said UEFA had nevertheless chosen to wait before taking action because it wanted to avoid the risk of Barcelona later being cleared by the ordinary courts.

“Before taking any action, they want to make sure the ordinary courts do not acquit them,” he said.

“Imagine Barcelona being suspended from competition for a year, with the huge financial losses that would result, and then the ordinary courts acquitting them. In that case, Barcelona’s claim would be so costly that it would cost UEFA a fortune.”

Programme presenter Julio Pulido concluded that UEFA’s latest statement amounted only to an acknowledgement that it had received Real Madrid’s documents. UEFA has not opened a separate new investigation and is instead waiting for the Spanish courts to deliver their final ruling.