Florentino Perez and Joan Laporta shared proximity, collaboration, and a long history of joint moments. They stood side by side, aligning strategically as Madrid and Barcelona formed a pact that later faltered only on the pitch. They even found common ground with Juventus, a club facing leadership changes, in the European Super League project before it faded from memory. The two clubs appeared united in the broader sport conflict, with Javier Tebas, the president of La Liga, often in the frame.
Both clubs pursued the same financial pathways, leaning on the same commercial partners to monetize new stadium developments. An example was Barça activating its first two economic levers with Legends, an American consultancy hired by Florentino to maximize resources from the Bernabéu, a plan that was approaching renewal. The same approach was later mirrored at Barcelona when a new Camp Nou design emerged, a project planned over about 18 months to mark the club’s 125th anniversary, initially set with 60 percent capacity and construction handled by Limak, a Turkish firm.
The two clubs remained in step, working in tandem until the Negreira case cast a shadow and the Barcelona Prosecutor’s Office opened an inquiry into payments made by Barça to the former Vice President of Technical Arbitrators over fourteen years. This backdrop prompted Florentino and Laporta to reassess their relationship and their public positions within the sport.
Careful time selection
SER Catalunya later revealed a financial link tying the former head of referees to the Barça organization, a disclosure that prompted silence from the white club’s president while protests from Sevilla and Espanyol found support in LaLiga’s statements, though Barça and Madrid did not sign a joint one. Both clubs ultimately declined to participate. Florentino, known for choosing moments with precision, kept quiet in the storm surrounding Barça as the issue intensified and drew governmental attention, including demands from the head of the national government for a thorough review.
Official statements surfaced from Real Madrid, emphasizing their stance as the situation unfolded. The club’s leadership waited for the prosecutorial report before addressing Laporta, choosing to speak during a critical league week and following a cup semi-final loss. The response came in a formal note defending the decision to delay action while public pressure grew among supporters.
“The weight of the charges”
Florentino argued that the gravity of the accusations against Barça and its presidents warranted careful reflection given concerns about corruption and the conduct linked to José María Enríquez Negreira, the former vice president of referees. The initial official memos did not name Madrid or specific figures, but Florentino pressed for a board discussion to determine concrete steps regarding the Negreira case, signaling potential moves to be announced by a Madrid meeting planned for that afternoon.
Real Madrid TV video of Clos Gómez
One action involved a report broadcast on the club’s television channel focusing on Clos Gómez, a former referee and current director of the VAR project. The piece reviewed data and footage from Gómez’s refereeing days, suggesting moments where the white club could have observed biased calls.
⚠️⚽️ @Itu_Edu
❌ “A constructive environment becomes a profession like arbitration”
@As_TomasRoncero
“If Megía Davila were found to be aligning with Barça, decisive action would be taken”
– Sports Carousel (@carousel) March 11, 2023
Following a fuller review on the white channel, former official Iturralde González, now a Cadena SER commentator, criticized the broadcast as inappropriate. Clos Gómez later indicated he had shown Madrid a wide tally of yellow and red cards during his career. Madrid, which had remained quiet during the Negreira case, began to act, presenting a narrative of rupture in the relationship with Laporta and signaling a shift in who led the process. The breakdown appeared precise, mirroring the league calendar, with Florentino and Laporta depicted as central figures in the dispute.
From the moment of the rift to the timing of public disclosures, the narrative unfolded in a way that framed Florentino as the principal orchestrator of the contentious path forward, even suggesting that Laporta could be positioned as a private prosecutor before leagues or federations weighed in. The split was becoming palpable as the sport faced a highly charged week ahead of a league classic, with Barça’s leadership feeling cornered by Florentino’s moves.
In this broader frame, the two clubs had previously moved in tandem on many fronts, yet the Negreira case exposed fractures in their alliance. The public drama reinforced the sense that Florentino controlled the sequence of events, influencing how the dispute would be perceived and addressed in the arena of national football politics.