The Never Again association, which previously reported to UEFA about referee Szymon Marciniak, posted a statement on social media in which the group’s co-founder, Rafał Pankowski, asserted that there were no demands to strip Marciniak of his refereeing duties. Rather than issuing an apology or expressing remorse for the damage allegedly done to Marciniak’s career, the post’s comment section was disabled, leaving followers with no immediate chance to respond publicly.
The controversy around the 42-year-old Polish official began in connection with his participation in a conference organized by a leader of a movement viewed as far right, Sławomir Mentzen. The letter regarding Marciniak was sent by the Never Again anti-discrimination association to UEFA, sparking widespread discussion about accountability and due process in international football officiating.
UEFA confirmed that Szymon Marciniak would continue to officiate the UEFA Champions League final, a match scheduled between Manchester City and Inter Milan in Istanbul on June 10. This decision has intensified debate about the balance between safeguarding integrity on the field and respecting the rights of officials amid external pressure.
READ ALSO:
– There is a UEFA decision. Szymon Marciniak remains the referee for the Champions League final; pursuing legal action against the Polish referee is unwarranted
— The Polish Football Association’s response to the umpire’s charge: After reviewing the matter with the arbiter, all allegations are dismissed
— A Deputy Minister with a public stance regarding the referee Marciniak visited and urged UEFA to consider the matter; a call to rally support for the national representative
Statement without apology
The association refrains from issuing an apologetic tone and instead emphasizes that Marciniak issued a clear statement and that direct communication has been established with his representative, as stated in the publication.
– The Never Again group maintains that it did not demand Marciniak be withheld from refereeing the Champions League final.
– This position appeared in a letter signed by the association’s co-founder, though no proposal was made to replace the referee.
Comments on the post have been disabled, which has fueled a broader debate on how organizations interact with referees in high-stakes competitions and how public discourse can impact professional decisions in sport.
Some observers question the logic behind the organization’s stance and point to the visible tension between public accountability and the protection of an official’s ability to perform without undue external pressure. Critics argue that social media activity surrounding high-profile referees can have lasting repercussions on career trajectories, regardless of the final outcomes of official processes.
Analysts note that the episode underscores the challenge faced by sports bodies in maintaining integrity while also navigating complex political and social currents. The events surrounding Marciniak’s involvement in the Champions League final have become a focal point in conversations about how far organizations should go in addressing perceived misconduct or impropriety, and where the line is drawn between discipline and due process.
In the broader context of international football governance, the incident highlights ongoing questions about transparency, the speed of public judgments, and the role of independent oversight in decisions that affect the careers of referees who operate on the world stage. As competitions progress, many watchers expect a continued dialogue on how to manage controversy without compromising the safety and fairness of the game for players, officials, and fans alike.
Widespread discourse on social platforms continues to reflect a mix of concern for due process, appreciation for the pressures faced by referees, and calls for more constructive mechanisms to address allegations while preserving the integrity of competitions. The debate is likely to persist as the sport’s community seeks a balanced approach that respects official governance structures and the rights of those who help enforce the rules on the field.
End of documented exchange. The topic remains a live matter in discussions about the ethics of refereeing and the responsibilities of organizations to respond to public concerns without prejudging outcomes.
This synthesis reflects ongoing observations about the situation and emphasizes the importance of measured, policy-driven responses from governing bodies amid public scrutiny.
Note: Details reflect reported developments and public statements made in relation to the case, without assigning formal conclusions or judgments to individuals involved.