Racism against Vinicius: the arbitration commission entered the scandal and issued an exemplary sentence in favor of the Brazilian

The RFEF Tender Committee agreed to leave the expulsion of Vinicius during the match of the thirty-fifth day of The League Santander.

“Given the allegations and videographic and graphic evidence provided by the real Madrid With regard to the sending off inflicted on the player Vinicius in the 95th minute of the match, this match commission considers that the alleged company indicates in an extensive document of allegations which agree as would be inferred from the videographic and graphical evidence provided, various causes which distort the presumption of veracity of the arbitration act”, indicates the panel.

The committee believes that “what happened would be part of a permanent and total impunityduring this season, of various actions of physical and verbal aggression, by opponents and fans, against the expelled player, all this in the face of the passivity of the refereeing team, the RFEF and La Liga”.

Likewise, he understands that “the action of the VAR referee could not be classified as a ‘human error’, since the image he sent to the referee of the match to evaluate the action produced was totally partial, partial and decisive for the referee’s error in the assessment of the incident and, with it, the unjust expulsion of the player, transforming the victim into an aggressor”.

Competition “invokes the irregularity of the existence of two successive acts, in which Only in the second would a reference to the insults received have been insertedpreviously, by the expelled player, even in a manifestly insufficient manner with respect to the reality of what happened.

In particular, it indicates that the law he only reflects that in the 73rd minute “a spectator from the south stand addressed the player… yelling ‘Monkey, monkey’when in fact a lot of evidence is provided to show that not only such a serious insult occurred during the match, but also “an indecent and significant amount of racist, demeaning and intolerant chants which, under no circumstances, can have a place in a stadium of football and which surprisingly the arbitration board did not listen, given that nothing is said in the arbitration act”.

He indicates that various videographic evidence is provided for this purpose in which he would be credited “That as soon as he arrived at the Valencia stadium, the player was greeted with insults by numerous fans who sang the chant “Vinicius you are a monkey”.

“That a number of insults were spoken to the player throughout the game, highlighting the following: ‘Fuckin’ black you idiot’, ‘I shitted on your dead you son of a bitch’, ‘Fuckin black, son of a bitch’, ‘Vinicius, dog “, “Monkey, you’re a fucking monkey” and “uh, uh, uh (imitating the sound of a monkey). The recording would also make it possible to identify that the insults come from a large group of people. Likewise, when the player left the pitch, he allegedly shouted “Vinicio die,” he adds.

Regarding the incident that led to the player’s sending off, Competition indicates that “in the evidence provided, initially the referee would have sanctioned him with a yellow card”.

“However, after viewing the images provided by the VAR, the referee changed his criteria, leaving the yellow card without effect and showing him the red one. Such a decision would be determined by the omission of the VAR ROOM of the entire game, without showing the aggression implemented a few seconds earlier by players 19 and 25 of the local team, who grabbed him by the neck, so much so that the expelled player, ‘in a desperate attempt to get rid of his arm around the neck of the rival player, faced with the imminent risk of suffocation, instinctively gets rid of the rival player,'” he explains.

“To all this we add that according to information published in the press by the RFEF itself, the VAR referee would be sent off due to the cutting of the images sent to the collegiate”, he indicates.

For all these reasons, the club requests the annulment of the aforementioned expulsion.

“It is the reiterated criterion of this Competition Commission that the assessment of a manifest material error in the arbitration act requires the provision of evidence which unequivocally, beyond any reasonable doubt, clearly demonstrates the non-existence of the fact reflected in the report or its blatant arbitrariness,” he says.