The dispute over the Príncipe Felipe pitch sparked heated reactions from figures connected to both Real Madrid and Cacereño. A prominent Italian critic called the surface unfit for professional football, prompting a chorus of responses from club leadership and the broader federation circle who felt the concern extended beyond a single match day.
Real Madrid’s coach expressed strong disappointment about the state of the playing surface at Príncipe Felipe, describing the condition as not suitable for football. His remarks were echoed by others close to the Spanish game, who believed the pitch shortchanged the spectacle and the players. The exchange set the tone for a conversation that stretched beyond the immediate game and touched on the standards expected in domestic cup competition. The clash between the two sides arrived with a backdrop of debate about how much the surface should influence a game and the broader implications for fans seeking high-quality football. [Goal]
Ancelotti: For him this is not football, it is a different sport
The match yielded a striking moment of merit from Rodrygo as Real Madrid edged past Segunda RFEF side Cacereño in the Copa del Rey. Yet the Real Madrid coach made it clear that on a pitch perceived as uneven, football as such cannot be properly realized. He spoke of the tension between charm and fairness in a competition that values entertainment and competitive spirit for supporters. The coach also highlighted that smaller clubs can compete with larger ones, a dynamic he believes enriches the experience for the audience while leaving room for improvement in playing conditions. The spectators deserve to see high-caliber clashes, he suggested, and the field should not impede the craft of the game. [Goal]
Another angle: the pitch critique comes from those involved with Cacereño
From the Cacereño side, the reaction followed a similar track but with a different emphasis. The club president reiterated that the grass was not ideal, noting that the surface affected both teams equally. A federation official from the Segunda RFEF weighed in, indicating surprise at the remarks but affirming that the surface challenge was not unique to one side. A commentator from Cadena SER weighed in as well, arguing that while the surface mattered, it should not excuse poor performance from any team. The sentiment maintained that football should be judged on its merits rather than on how a field plays, and that all involved should strive for consistency in venue conditions. [Goal]
In a further perspective, another leader referenced a prior fixture where Coria faced Real Sociedad on a field of similar quality and noted that the pitch did not excuse or disable competitive play. The underlying point was that a fair assessment should consider both teams equally, ensuring that any criticism aimed at one side would also apply to the other in similar circumstances. The message emphasized equity in evaluation and a shared standard of playing surfaces across the competition. [Goal]
Iván Fernández, a player for Cacereño, joined the discussion from the mixed zone. He described the pitch as having a noticeable softness and a tendency to cause slips for all players, underscoring the practical impact of the condition on performance and safety. His remarks reflected a cautionary stance that while the field might not have been ideal, it affected everyone on the field, not just the visitors. The narrative around the day, then, balanced a call for higher standards with an acknowledgement of equal exposure to the surface by both sides. [Goal]
Source: Goal