ไทย
English
中國人
Real Madrid is no stranger to lodging complaints about referees and perceived unfair treatment.
Just last month, Los Blancos pointed the finger at a referee following their defeat to city rivals Atlético. The club's official match report carried the headline, "A terrible refereeing display settles the derby," as calls grew for two Atlético players to be dismissed in the opening half alone.
Real Madrid were also left frustrated the previous weekend when Vinícius Júnior received a red card for pulling an opponent's hair.
Toward the close of last season, referees had pushed back, submitting formal complaints against Real Madrid president Florentino Pérez and Real Madrid TV in a bid to "combat any manifestation of violence, harassment or discrediting of refereeing."
The subject even prompted a startling statement from Javier Tebas last week that drew a fierce reaction from the club.
The irony is therefore considerable now that the tables appear to have turned, with Real Madrid accused of benefiting from a contentious decision during Sunday's 4–1 victory over Sevilla.
Sevilla felt Arda Güler should have been shown a red card in the first half, when the scoreline was still level at 0–0. The moment in question involved Güler and Sevilla midfielder Peque Fernández, with the latter appearing to restrain the former during a phase of play.
Güler's reaction appeared to be an attempt to break free using his arm. Sevilla argue this constituted violent conduct and warranted his dismissal from the match.
Sevilla manager Luis García questioned why the VAR official failed to step in, going as far as to suggest some form of conspiracy. "Why didn't they call the VAR officials?" he said angrily after the game. "Maybe so they don't get nine points [behind Barcelona] ahead of the Clásico."
García acknowledged that Real Madrid merited the win in the 11 vs. 11 contest that unfolded, but maintains Sevilla were "robbed" of competing with a "numerical advantage from the 25th minute."
The manager added: "At half time, Peque was telling me that [Güler] had struck him. It's a red card. We need to speak to the VAR official more than the referee. The referee may not see it; he doesn't have eyes in the back of his head. And even more so when Real Madrid, Atlético Madrid or Barcelona are playing, when there are more cameras."
VAR Didn't Have Conclusive Evidence
Camera coverage — or the absence of suitable angles — may have been at the heart of the problem. Television replays did capture the incident, but only from afar and without the clarity needed to determine whether intervention and a punishment would have been warranted.
Radio station Cadena SER cited a source within Spain's Technical Committee of Referees who explained: "VAR has the same cameras as the television broadcast. If there was no intervention, it's because there is no clear and unquestionable evidence of violent conduct."
Iturralde González, a refereeing analyst for AS and Cadena SER, described the shortage of usable footage as "pathetic" for a competition that aspires to be regarded as the finest domestic league on the planet. "It seems like something happened, but there wasn't a clear replay to confirm it. I can see [Güler] swing his arm, but you can't tell whether it connects with [Peque's] face because the images are so poor.
"It's pathetic … if we're the best league in the world, this level of replay quality shouldn't be acceptable. To send off a player, there can't be any doubt, and with the footage available, you simply cannot determine whether there was an elbow or not."
Arda Guler Denies 'Something That Wasn't Seen'
The absence of definitive proof was also what José Mourinho highlighted when the subject was predictably raised during his postgame press conference.
"Nobody has been able to show me what they claim happened," he said with a shrug.
"I don't have a single image. I've asked everyone for footage, including my own staff, and I haven't been able to find any evidence of what they're talking about that has upset Luis.
"I'm being completely honest when I say that if something occurred that worked in our favor, I'd have no issue stepping up and admitting it. But I think the opposite scenario is far more likely because that's the natural tendency.
"If someone sends me a clear image by Saturday of something I haven't seen, and that Güler also says never happened, I'll be there. But for now, nothing. I ask you: has any one of you seen a clear image? I don't understand the fixation with something that wasn't even visible."