No question for the Catalan club to draw inspiration from our PO system which, let's be honest, still shows its relevance in terms of the spectacle it offers except for the Union supporters who have not finished cursing it. No, Joan Laporta or his advisors visibly appreciated another facet of Belgian football: its excessively litigious side.
Considering himself wronged at the end of the last Clasico after Lamine Yamal's goal was not awarded in a championship which does not use goal line technology, considered too expensive, because the VAR failed, the fault of the breakdown of the camera intended to ensure aerial photography above the Real goal line, the Barcelona president cited Belgian case law in his argument. Stating in a video “If it is confirmed that the goal was valid, we will request that the match be replayed, as happened in another match in Europe following a VAR error.”
Barça wants Clasico to be replayed if refereeing error is proven
The management of Genk will appreciate the wink and will perhaps advise their Barcelona counterpart. More seriously, in this story, Laporta is in his role: that of defending the interests of his club. With a memory that is necessarily a little selective, so many have complained about arbitration favorable to Barça in recent years in heated debates in La Liga. But also in Europe, with the climax of the famous comeback so questionable that Uefa banned the referee who officiated that evening, Deniz Aytekin, from speaking about Paris SG or FC Barcelona, neither then entrusting him with only second-rate posters until his continental retirement in 2022. The fact remains that such a way of doing things clashes with the slogan of an institution which wants to be more than a club by finding itself an actor in what is more than a controversy but the symbol of all its frustrations this season.
