Disclosure of payments to Jose Luis Enriquez Negreira and his son by all the presidents of the FC Barcelona of the 21st century They generated a torrent of reactions that inflamed as the exorbitant amount of remuneration was discovered, the confusion about the final destination of the money and the nebula about the tasks entrusted. So far, different Spanish football characters and some leaders of the Barça club have spoken without being able to clarify anything. What is unknown is what the partners think of a scandal that has damaged the reputation of an entity that prides itself on being more than a club, right now suspected of seeking arbitration favors behind the scenes.
It is a scandal that is not going to disappear in a while and with unforeseeable consequences, both sporting and criminal. While Joan Laporta delegates the origin of these payments and why they continued for so many years (until 2018) to an external investigation, the partners consulted demand greater speed in providing convincing explanations. We ask groups of those who are motivated by the governance of the club, not only if the Xavi’s Barca will beat Valencia on Sunday. There is no public opinion poll ambition, but simply to give a voice to some partners who represent a group.
RICARD FAURA, from Dignitat Blaugrana
“We are concerned about the paralysis that seems to affect the board in responding to a situation that endangers the prestige of the club. The most splendid years of the entity are being called into question. And silence or non-response is the worst” , it states Ricardo Fauratechno-anthropologist and top vocal of Dignitat Blaugrana.
For Faura, the delay he perceives from Joan Laporta’s board of directors is disturbing. “The longer it takes to give an explanation, the worse the subject smells,” he adds. “That it takes so long is a sign that the explanation should not be easy.”
Faura avoids loading inks and finding guilty about these payments to the former vice president of the Technical Committee of Referees (CTA). “We lack information.” That is why he demands “to be transparent and exemplary, because we believe in ‘more than a club’.
In his group, he says, they have received many messages and questions from members and supporters clubs concerned about the root of these remunerations and its potential consequences. “It’s an issue that worries us, and we in particular also with regard to the Espai Barça. Those who have to lend you the money take reputation into account and it’s being lost, thus endangering the viability of the operation.”
JAUME BARROSO, from Compromisaris FCB
Jaume Barroso alleges that opinion groups such as Compromisaris FCB entered a zone of fatigue after the wear and tear of championing the motion of no confidence against Josep Maria Bartomeu and now they see themselves in the situation of positioning themselves again before an arbitration controversy that is staining the name of the club. Barroso, a lawyer specializing in sports and commercial law, laments like Faura the institutional response to date. “Laporta’s first reaction was unsatisfactory and insufficient. And events have subsequently ratified it. We cannot normalize facts that are objectively serious.” And he adds: “We are waiting for reasonable, satisfactory and convincing explanations to be provided to us. First to the member and then also to public opinion, because the club’s reputation is at stake.”
For Barroso, it is crucial to separate FC Barcelona from internal charges that could have acted incorrectly. “We must put the focus on the people who acted badly, otherwise the focus remains on the club, and that is what it cannot be. The club should not be involved in all of this, otherwise it should be the loser.” That is why he asks for that clear institutional explanation: “It is the duty of the leaders to protect the interests of the club.”
The spokesperson for Compromisaris FCB is blunt with the nature of the events. “Many outraged partners have contacted us. It is not acceptable to pay a former arbitration leader and that he is paid so much money, more than a CEO.” Barroso wrote a tweet when the delimited investigation from 2016 to 2018, from the time of Bartomeu, was known: “This only has one name: shame.” He now extends this assessment: “It is embarrassing if it was with Barto, with Laporta or with Rosell. For a matter of ethics, because an arbitration charge cannot be paid if we promote ‘fair play’ and on top of that for a disproportionate amount”.
CARLES AGUSTÍ, Mr. Ramon
“We focus this case on the root of the problem, which is the club’s governance model and the control that the member can exercise, which is non-existent, practically zero. A model comparable to that of the 60s and 70s of the last century. All We know how the assemblies of delegates work and we have all agreed that they are outdated. There is no alternative to real control. We are in a presidential governance model, exempt from any democratic control. This causes events like the one we are talking about: the lack of control, so much money involved and an old management model pave the way for things like this to happen,” says Carles Agustí, an international consultant on governance issues who represents the opinion group El Senyor Ramon.
Linked to this reflection, he observes the Espai Barça with suspicion. “It’s another nest of potential wrongdoing. We need more transparency.” Regarding the Negreira case in particular, Carles Agustí points out “the exorbitant amounts” paid to the ex-collegiate and the “frivolity” with which the members’ money has been handled all these years. “In general, there is disappointment with all the presidents. We don’t want to single out anyone because we don’t know exactly what has happened, but the last people responsible are always the presidents.” And how do you see Laporta’s performance to date? “I see Laporta overwhelmed because of this obsolete model.”
At the same time, it underlines bad intention in exploiting the scandal. “We ask for firmness before this campaign. Many clubs have resorted to this type of arbitration services. We understand that not with these amounts or the opacity of Barça. But we cannot allow it to be extrapolated from there that Barça has bought referees. That must be denounced “.
MARC CORNET, Follow-up FCB
Journalist Marc Cornet, from Follow-up FCB, puts the accent on the reactions more than on the origin of the case. “It seems to me very exaggerated how the Madrid press has turned to this issue without proof or indications that resist the idea that they have helped us.”
And he continues in this line: “It is very exaggerated and this harassment cannot be accepted. It is as if they wanted to rewrite history, when the suspicion is rather the opposite, that the referees have traditionally harmed us. They go for all. They want question some blameless successes”.
And hasn’t the entity’s image been tarnished? “They want to stain it. There is a lot of interest in staining it. It is a controversy that must be resized. Bad if there have been irregular payments, but I think that the partner does not think much about this issue.”
Related news
Looking inside, for Cornet, the origin of all the evils lies in the fact that “there is not much transparency. It is a pending issue. There is a lot of opacity.”
And it opens suspicions: “The serious thing is not the payments to this gentleman, what an eye, they are, but the amount of things that have had to be paid that we do not know. There is a lack of a control system, a figure of an auditor like the that controls the town halls. We already know that there is a ‘compliance’, but after all, the directive itself has put it in place”.