The fallout from the latest Clásico between Barcelona and Real Madrid continues, with both crowd behavior and refereeing decisions now under official review by Spanish football authorities.
LaLiga included insults directed at Real Madrid winger Vinicius Jr. by Barcelona supporters in its weekly report submitted to both the Disciplinary Committee of the Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) and the Anti-Violence Commission.
Advertisement
At the same time, the Technical Committee of Referees (CTA) publicly defended referee Alejandro Hernández Hernández over one of the most debated incidents of the match: Eric Garcia’s contact with Jude Bellingham inside the penalty area.
Vinicius Jr. once again found himself at the center of abusive behavior from opposition supporters during a high-profile match in Spain.
LaLiga formally documented insults from Barcelona fans in its weekly disciplinary report, forwarding the incidents to the relevant authorities within Spanish football. The reports are routinely analyzed by both the RFEF’s Disciplinary Committee and the Anti-Violence Commission, which can determine whether sanctions or further measures are necessary.
Advertisement
The Brazilian forward has repeatedly been subjected to abuse during matches in Spain over the past several seasons, making him one of the central figures in the broader discussion surrounding fan conduct and racism in Spanish football.
The inclusion of these incidents in the official report ensures the chants and insults are now part of the disciplinary process following the Clásico.
Another major talking point from the match involved a penalty appeal from Jude Bellingham after contact from Barcelona defender Eric Garcia.
In its analysis program Tiempo de Revisión, the CTA defended Hernández Hernández’s on-field decision not to award a penalty and explained why VAR chose not to intervene.
Advertisement
According to the refereeing body, the incident fell within the “natural dynamics” of the defender’s movement.
“Contact actions in these types of plays must be assessed based on intensity, intent, and consequences. For the CTA, this is an action produced within the natural dynamics of the defending player’s movement, who, in his displacement, ends up making contact with the opponent’s face with his arm,” the CTA explained.
The committee argued that the incident was subjective and therefore not suitable for VAR intervention under current protocol.
“We understand that the decision made on the field can be upheld. We are therefore faced with an action that is entirely open to interpretation, and following the VAR philosophy, we are not in any way dealing with a clear, obvious, and manifest error. Therefore, the non-intervention is in accordance with protocol.”
