Message 1, burofax dated 3 December 2018
Within a sequence of confidential faxes that later entered the public domain, a clerical document dated December 3, 2018, stands out as the earliest in the chain. It reveals a stance that blends pressure with an appeal for transparency. The former vice-chairman of the Committee of Technical Referees asserts that Barcelona had arranged to operate in a manner that limited the club’s ability to provide services to third parties. He notes that the guidance had been implemented after discussions, reportedly in close coordination with the President, to the point of suggesting that secrets and favors could be exchanged repeatedly, ranging from professional to personal matters. The tone shifts here from routine administration to a veiled warning about how information could be used, should there be any drift from the agreed path. (Source: El Mundo, 2023).
Additionally, the document indicates that Negreira understood a payment owed to his organization was tied to some administrative error. He requests that the outstanding debt be settled within ten working days. The vice president of the CTA expresses optimism that the matter will resolve in a way that preserves the interests of all parties involved, yet he hints at potential consequences if the debt remains unresolved. The communication closes with a direct, if cautious, appeal to honor the debt to avoid what he describes as greater evils and undesirable acts for both sides. The language points to a delicate balance being sought between continued collaboration and the maintenance of professional boundaries, all while signaling that the relationship between FC Barcelona and Negreira had entered a phase where financial obligations could be used as leverage. (El Mundo report).
Post 2, burofax at the end of 2018
A second burofax from late 2018 broadens the narrative, presenting Negreira as someone who would publicly expose irregularities should payment arrangements falter. He states that everything known and all contextual facts tied to him and his interactions with Barcelona and its leadership would be laid bare if there was no agreement on the terms laid out by his camp. The message frames the issue as a test of loyalty and trust, suggesting that the club’s leaders, including Bartomeu, had benefited from a long-standing relationship that could be reassessed in light of settled payments. (El Mundo, 2019).
Negreira also conveys personal offense at what he characterizes as an unjust slight after years of collaboration. He contemplates taking legal action, warning of potentially serious consequences if the dispute escalates, yet he notes a preference to avoid such disputes in the hope of reaching a pragmatic resolution. The communication implies that a scandal could derail the club’s prospects and stresses a desire to maintain stability for all involved. This section underscores the tension between continued collaboration and the friction that payment disputes can generate when trust is tested. (El Mundo, 2019).
Post 3, offer in 2020
In 2020, Negreira reemerges in the dialogue with a distinct proposal, even as his formal role with the Technical Referees Committee had already faded. He reaches out with a proposition tied to VAR, asserting that his assistance could be valuable to the club in managing officiating decisions, and hinting at the leverage that his experience could provide. The phrasing implies a direct offer to influence the arbitration landscape in ways that could favor Barcelona, should the club welcome his involvement. The moment aligns with a broader context: sporting events confronted disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic, a period that altered how leagues operated and how officiating matters were handled.
Historically, the 2020 moment coincides with a season that saw Real Madrid crowned champions, a result often discussed in relation to arbitration and refereeing decisions. The narrative suggests that the title had been achieved despite, or perhaps in part because of, decisions favored by officiating outcomes that benefited Madrid in certain standings. The text implies a perception—whether fully substantiated or not—that arbitration was a factor in the competitive balance. Barcelona, on the other hand, chose to decline the proposal, particularly given that Negreira no longer held the vice-chairmanship and after prior warnings directed at Bartomeu and the club. The episode illustrates how the line between official sports governance and informal influence can blur when personal history intersects with club ambitions. (El Mundo, 2020).