In the “F90” cycle on ESPN, Diego Latorre interviewed Rodolfo De Paoliformer coach of Barracas Central. In the talk, the former technical director of the southern Buenos Aires team admitted on air that when his team won it was thanks to Claudio “Chiqui” Tapia. “I already assumed it when I arrived, if I don’t win, nothing happens and if I win, the president of the AFA won. That was already clear to me,” said the coach.
In the report, De Paoli stated how the current head of the AFA thought about the game strategy of the Baraca team. “Chiqui in my ear, sometimes he tells me ‘defend me ten meters further back’, and I brush him off and tell him ‘look that Scaloni took you out as world champion 10 meters further back’,” the coach said anecdotally.
The questions against Barracas Central and against Claudio Tapia as a key figure in the leadership of Argentine football have multiplied in recent weeks. The focus of criticism revolves around alleged repeated refereeing advantages, conflicts of interest and the use of its institutional influence to benefit the club.
A recent official report prepared by SADRA, the union that brings together the referees, denounced “irregularities” and “manipulation of results” in favor of Barracas. In that sense, the statistics that accompany the analysis indicate that, since 2017 —when Tapia assumed leadership of the Argentine Football Association—, the club would have received 8.59% more favorable referee rulings and 28.1% fewer sanctions against it, which, according to the authors, would imply an advantage of between 9 and 18 points per tournament.
Recent party history provides fuel for these accusations. For example, in a match between Barracas Central and Newell’s Old Boys, penalties and unsanctioned decisions were called against the rivals, which raised strong questions about the impartiality of the refereeing. In another case, a match against Estudiantes de La Plata ended in a draw, but the dispute centered on a play where Estudiantes claimed a foul prior to a goal by the rival, which was ignored by the referee and the VAR. Tempers in the stands flared up, with insulting chants towards Tapia.
Faced with criticism, Tapia responded publicly that “it is not always the referee’s fault,” and maintained that not every Barracas victory is explained by referee errors, stating that “the players win or lose the games.” He also added that the favorable rulings towards his club – and others – could be due to “a historical suggestion”, similar to what, according to him, existed at the time of his predecessor, Julio Grondona.
Beyond the arbitration, the magnitude of the club’s transformation has also been questioned: the recent reopening of the Barracas stadium, which bears the name of Tapia, doubled its capacity (from 6,000 to 12,000 seats) and modernized the facilities, a historic leap for an institution of its size. Some critics point out that this structural advance, added to the supposed sporting benefits, reinforce the idea of “privileged treatment” sustained over time.
In this context, institutional and political voices such as that of the minister Federico Sturzenegger They warn about the need to review the appointment system and improve transparency. Although the institutional management of Barracas has prospered in sports and in terms of infrastructure, the suspicion persists that this success is not limited to internal merits, but would be favored by a network of managerial power.
You may also be interested
Image gallery
