The Negreira case

[DonAK]

The case already was accepted no? Or did something happen in the last days?

There was a leak today that 9 months ago the investigators were asking Rubiales about what role Negreira had in refereeing and if he could influence games or not.

Not decided yet if it's going to go to trial from what I've read. Prosecution been told to bring forward something that could make it viable.

 

[DonAK]

I'll have to read up on the updates though [MENTION=29831]ajnotkeith[/MENTION] but from what I can see they asked Rubiales 9 months ago if Negreira was in the position to influence referees and he said he didn't have the capacity to do that?

 

[ajnotkeith]

I'll have to read up on the updates though [MENTION=29831]ajnotkeith[/MENTION] but from what I can see they asked Rubiales 9 months ago if Negreira was in the position to influence referees and he said he didn't have the capacity to do that?

Yeah. I think it is true - multiple refs have said it and it's likely he didn't have enough influence to make any serious difference to results. Who knows (if bribing was the intention) if he even tried to. I think like some former refs have said, he sold the club lies and the club bought it.

The problem is that to be convicted of this offense and indeed what matters is only the intention, not if it had any impact on refereeing or results. From what I've seen it looks very uncomfortable for the club on that part and we have Tebas talking relegation now.

 

[serghei]

The problem is that to be convicted of this offense and indeed what matters is only the intention, not if it had any impact on refereeing or results. From what I've seen it looks very uncomfortable for the club on that part and we have Tebas talking relegation now.

Still need to prove it. If someone recorded Negreira while trying to convice a ref to take some money to favor us, and the ref said no, that should do it, that would convict us.

Doubt it. If he did that, and the ref didn't take a bribe, he should have reported it on the spot. The only logical reason why a ref would not report it, is if he took the bribe.

No matter how you slice or dice it, intention or actual bribe, hard evidence needs to be presented pre-trial or the case should be dropped. If not, the club should countersue if there's no evidence and this goes to trial, as a trial is still very damaging to our image and our economical situation.

Tebas likes to talk a lot, that we already know.

 

[Gari]

Stronger.

This charge would have been the culmination of years of investigation under the public radar. That means two things - they have considered there isn't much more evidence to find, and that all their evidence was collected under the radar.

Nothing can be hidden that wasn't already found by them most likely and they have a pretty clear picture of the facts by this point.

If they've then decided to bring charges it is bad.

But you can also say the exact opposite. They tried for many years to find at least something, they didn?t find it and decided to involve the press, just make a scandal. If you have evidence, you don?t go to the press, but to the court.

 

[Barcelonista001]

It seems after el clasico not a talk about this matter in the news papers!
The noises became less

 

[Gari]

""The Prosecutor's Office saw no evidence that Bar?a paid Negreira to have refereeing decisions in their favour, nor that any of the payments influenced the result of any match. The Tax Agency had already informed the Prosecutor's Office in April 2022 that they were unable to confirm that Bar?a's payments to Negreira influenced refereeing decisions in Barcelona's favour.The Prosecutor's Office found refereeing reports for Real Madrid matches, made by Negreira. They found evidence of several reports, including one of Gil Manzano and Mateu Lahoz. This supports Bar?a's position, who say these payments are for refereeing advice."
Everything will end in nothing. Laporta must answer and sue, especially the role of Tebas. Without him, everything would have ended before it started.

 

[JamDav1982]

This has next to nothing to do with Tebas.

 

[ajnotkeith]

The Prosecutors Office saw no evidence yet decided to bring charges on exactly that claim.

Makes no sense.

 

[vuji_31]

⚖️ The Prosecutor's Office found refereeing reports for Real Madrid matches, made by Negreira. They found evidence of several reports, including one of Gil Manzano and Mateu Lahoz. This supports Bar?a's position, who say these payments are for refereeing advice. [Agencia EFE]

 

[Porque]

If this amount to nothing then Tebas shows what a fool he is, deciding to shit in his mouth in public, for no reason at all.

 

[vuji_31]

https://www.elmundo.es/deportes/futbol/2023/03/22/641a4f70e4d4d821238b4570.html

It seems they find pappers about Negrira buying sandwich makers to referees, buying presents...

Also wp messages where son of referee was saying how they robbed Atletico M against us..

 

[Luftstalag14]

Used our money? That is ludicrous. How does El Mundo or anybody else know whose money it was?

Also, the act of buying gifts for referees doesn't automatically assume ulterior motives such as wanting them to do Barca a favor etc.

 

[Luftstalag14]

https://www.mundodeportivo.com/futbol/fc-barcelona/20230322/1001971622/juer.html

The 5 tasks that we allegedly asked Negreira to perform:

1. Request that the Competition Committee, responsible for disciplinary sanctions against players, not be composed entirely of Madrid judges.

2. That the club had an interlocutor with the Royal Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) to take care of institutional relations.

3. Recommend thatyellow cards or expulsions could be appealed after a match, because the refereeing decision could be technically debatable.

4. Inform or notify of any institutional visit of the RFEF or the CTA.

5. Keep the club informed of possible interests or disagreements between the RFEF and Liga de F?tbol Profesional (LFP) or describe candidates to chair the LFP.

IF true, the first one could be problematic for us, however the rest are pretty normal to me.

 

[Porque]

Used our money? That is ludicrous. How does El Mundo or anybody else know whose money it was?

Also, the act of buying gifts for referees doesn't automatically assume ulterior motives such as wanting them to do Barca a favor etc.

Well, this would be from the tax deductables of his business. So I'm assuming he submitted these as business expenses from the company set up that received the Barcelona contract.

Now, as this primarily seems like a tax investigation into Neguiera. I don't think it is actually relevant to us paying off referees or not. That is something that seems to have evolved from the Neguiera tax investigation.

The latter could very well be true, but it is more a creation of the media and/or something that evolved from the intital investigation. It is an incredibly more worthy story than "Former Vice referee of LaLiga failed to declare income correctly".