These are difficult times for the arbitration body. On the last day, two footballers (Darder and Pacha Espino) and the same coaches (Simeone and Iraola) made public a feeling widespread in all Spanish football teams: the fear of being penalized for expressing their opinion in post-match statements . Another blow to the image of national arbitration after the scandal of the Negreira Case and the actions of recent dates by the referees. Darder was the first to raise his voice. After DAZN ‘s question about the performance of referee Ortiz Arias, the Spanish midfielder replied: “ I think a player has already been unfairly penalized for speaking (referring to Canales). I will be punished for more than four games if I comment on what I think of arbitration. I think that with that I tell you everything ”. Pacha Espino , captain of Cádiz, was the second to refer to the ‘censorship’ experienced by footballers and coaches. ” For me it is a hand (that of Pape Gueye). However, it is like everything. You cannot speak because then they sanction you ”, He affirmed. Simeone and Iraola also spoke, which the RFEF Disciplinary Code allows them, on the subject. The Argentine, when asked about the absence of the sanctioned Canales, assured that “these are difficult times to give an opinion because anything you can say can be sanctioned .” In addition, he affirmed that “you have to accept what you touch at all times and in this you have to talk little.” The Rayista coach, after the controversial penalty awarded to Balliu, stated: ” I can’t say what I think because otherwise they’re going to penalize me .”
AFE requests a change in the Disciplinary Code
The CTA and Competition Committee cling to article 99 of the RFEF Disciplinary Code to justify the sanctions imposed on Gayá last season or Canales in the current one, for example. The paragraph reads as follows: “Insulting, offending or addressing the main referee, assistants, fourth referee, managers or sports authorities in insulting terms or attitudes, unless it constitutes a more serious offense, will be penalized with a suspension of four to twelve games”. The footballers, fed up with this law of silence, rise up against the regulations that prevent them from criticizing refereeing decisions in post-match statements. AFE points out that article 99 of the Disciplinary Code “controls” and “intimidates” the players before the constitutional right they have to be able to give an opinion: “It does not adequately distinguish between opinion and qualification. It is different to accuse for prevarication than to state something for the right to express an opinion that any person has, as established in the Spanish Constitution. It is part of the pluralism that must prevail in any democratic society”.