Real Madrid defender Raul Asencio has reignited the long-running Negreira debate with a cryptic comment about Barcelona, insisting that the controversy’s shadow remains despite the ongoing legal process.
Speaking to AS, the Madrid defender was asked about the case involving payments made by Barcelona to companies linked to Jose Maria Enriquez Negreira, the former vice-president of Spain’s Technical Committee of Referees.
Asencio offered little detail but suggested that the controversy continues to carry weight, despite the absence of a finding establishing that Barcelona manipulated refereeing decisions.
Asencio makes cryptic Negreira case claimThe Negreira case centres on approximately €7.3 million in payments made between 2001 and 2018 to companies owned by Negreira.
Raul Asencio has offered his take on the Negreira case. (Photo by Yasser Bakhsh/Getty Images)
Barcelona have maintained that the payments related to technical refereeing reports and scouting work rather than an attempt to influence match officials.
Real Madrid have continued to pursue the matter beyond Spain, including by submitting documentation to UEFA as they seek disciplinary action against Barcelona.
Asked about the controversy, Asencio gave a brief but pointed response, stating,
“Negreira’s shadow is there. And if it’s there, it’s for a reason. But I’m not going to say any more.”
Barcelona face continued scrutinyBarcelona’s relationship with Real Madrid is completely broken. (Photo by Angel Martinez/Getty Images)
UEFA has received documentation submitted by Real Madrid concerning the Negreira case, but any potential disciplinary action remains dependent on the legal process.
For Barcelona, the club’s position has consistently been that the payments were for legitimate technical services and that there was no sporting corruption involved.
The case has therefore become another point of tension between the two Spanish giants, with Real Madrid continuing to pursue the issue while Barcelona maintain their defence of the payments.
Asencio’s comments add another voice from Madrid to the debate, although his refusal to elaborate means they offer little clarity about what he believes the so-called “shadow” represents.