JamDav1982
Senior Member
Iturralde González: “Real Madrid did not want me to be the referee in their Copa del Rey final against Barça.”
Much easier when dont have to pay for it.
Much easier when dont have to pay for it.
That would make more sense. The money laundering angle seems illogical.There were stories from those around him that he frittered the money away as burned a hole in pocket and would take out in cash a certain amount at a time to avoid investigation.
Flash Harry constantly spending it away.
Averaged at just over 400k a year or so. Its a lot but can soon be wasted and also his son at least taking some of that.
I believe that the corruption angle wiil go as he had such little influence at all on the referees and being one of many who grades referees doesnt have nearly the influence some make out. It is very difficult within that to falsely rate refs to point has any real impact on league.
Also it protects the league from all the implications of any corruption taking place.
Being stripped back to 'attempt' to bribe a public official.
Just because money hasn't exchanged hands that doesn't mean the referreeing isn't corrupted.
When you have a system in place where the La Liga president always supports Madrid and you make sure the vast majority of referees support Madrid, there's no real need for Madrid to dip in to their pockets is there? The corruption and bias in their favour has been implemented for them, from the very beginning, FOR FREE.
Those that think that a referee that supports Real Madrid won't subconsciously benefit them in a profession that is so largely reliant on interpretation are wildly wrong. Anyone that has an emotional attachment to anything will subconsciously be favourable to that thing. That's a human fact. These referees are not able to defy the laws of nature.
And if you think Tebas is bad, there was a Real Madrid supporting La Liga president who openly said " AS LONG AS I AM PRESIDENT, I WILL MAKE SURE BARCELONA DOES NOT WIN A TROPHY. " That is outright, undeniable evidence of a system put in to place to favour Real Madrid and hurt Barcelona. Where was the court case for that one? Yet another one who needs to testify in court now, it seems.
And then you have the Classico as early as 5 years ago when a linesman came out and said he was asked to favour Real Madrid. But Franco's club gets that completely washed away. Where is the criminal trial for that one???? Seems to have been buried away. Contrast it to the reaction to the Negreira case and you realise that nothing has changed today from the 2000s or even Francos time himself.
No, I've just stated absolute facts, not innuendo and suspicion ( Read the Negreira case it you want a bit of that ) that are impossible for Madrid fans like yourself to refute. Unsurprisingly, no Madrid fan tried to do so.You make it sound as if Madrid dominated domestically for two decades +, while paying official millions.
No, I've just stated absolute facts, not innuendo and suspicion ( Read the Negreira case it you want a bit of that ) that are impossible for Madrid fans like yourself to refute. Unsurprisingly, no Madrid fan tried to do so.
Forgive me, if I find Real Madrid fans getting on their high horse and pointing the finger a little difficult to stomach, given the 'facts'.
Slovenian retard who made profile and just posts in this thread.Who the fuck are you?
The circumstantial evidence certainly insinuates wrongdoing. One must, however, wonder why the the prosecution would bring charges if it cannot prove how Barcelona benefited.The full judgement is readable here.Barcelona remain 'calm' over latest developments in the Negreira case
The Catalan club are not concerned by Thursday's bribery accusationswww.sport.es
The judge specifies that the reason for the change of the charge from sports corruption to bribery is that he considers sports corruption is a crime between private individuals (a player, a coach, a chairman etc), and as per a European ruling on the Italian FA, an official working in the regulation of football is not a private individual. He says the charge of sports corruption has only been applied in cases of outright match fixing and not for payments to regulating officials, nor over such a long period of time.
(Convienient that it just so happens to be much easier to prove also). With that said, the charge of bribery also carries more significant punishments.
They have no real proof yet that Barcelona gained anything from the payments. Their evidence gathering up to now has been verifying that Barca made the payments to Negreira Sr specifically and forming the charge based off that.
The judge hypothesises that Barca gained in a sporting way based on these key facts :
1- 8 million would not have been paid for nothing
2- The payments gradually got bigger and bigger, implying Barca were convinced they continued to gain something. They went from just 70k to 700k at their highest. The judge says this is because Barca likely believed the payments were having a desired effect and they were getting something for the money
3- Negreira's threatening letters to Bartomeu where he said that he would expose 'favours' he had done for the club and things which could damage the club's reputation. The judge believes the threat from Negreira to be real and that he would not have said this if he did not either carry out himself or had a close connection to those who carried out said favours.
4 - That the payments ceased immediately as Negreira stepped down from his role as Vice President of the CTA, with Negreira also stating this is why payments were stopped, showing they referred to his role as Vice President and not any reports that were being made for the club.
So, the judge's words at the moment about Barca gaining sportively are the result of his logical inferences from circumstantial evidence, but there is no hypothesis or facts about actually how Negreira could have favoured Barca (that is what they are trying to find now).
Maybe I’m wrong but that seems to be a very American concept. Get Poncho the criminal to testify in exchange for immunity… in order to get at the even bigger fish.If we had bribed referees, surely by now one would have owned up to it in exchange for immunity from prosecution if that's even possible. Feel like the spanish government would rather take down a giant like barca and let one man go.
Well it is the same legal principle as always, attempting to commit a crime doesn't require the success of it to incur punishments.The idea of referees being paid off is going to vanish most likely.
Both because they cant find evidence of any direct influence on referees and because it protects the 'integrity' of the competition and would open up a whole new can of worms for Spanish football.
It is going down road of 'intent' to gain an advantage through bribery even if did not receive it.
Which then puts the charge in a difficult place as they have said Barca continued to pay for it as 'evidence' they recieved a service... well if there was no corruption then they are contradciting themselves to say Barca paid for it continously or Barca thought they were getting unfair advantage.
Left with prosecution trying to argue Barca paid for 18 years for something they did not receive which contradicts the idea that they paid for 18 years as happy with what paid for.