Libra hits out at Flamengo: Brazilian football has no owner | OneFootball

The conflict between the member clubs of the Brazilian Football League (Libra) and Flamengo added another chapter on Friday night (3rd). The entity, formed by Palmeiras, São Paulo, Santos, Red Bull Bragantino, Guarani, Atlético-MG, Grêmio, Bahia, Vitória, Remo, Paysandu, Volta Redonda, ABC, Sampaio Corrêa, Brusque, and Flamengo, issued a statement, republished by the other members, criticizing the posture of the Rio club.

Over the past week, the imbroglio had several episodes, including public criticisms made by Leila Pereira, president of Palmeiras, who stated that Flamengo's board's attitude was 'arrogant and deceitful' in the face of the scenario. Next, the president raised the tone, suggesting that 'the Rio club should play alone'. Finally, there was the mockery, when Leila used the term 'terraflanistas', alluding to flat earthers, to refer to the conflict.

The controversy revolves around the blocking of payments to the other group members, achieved by Flamengo in the Rio de Janeiro Court. The red-black claims to have been harmed by the rules of money distribution and seeks a review of the agreement, which was signed by the club's previous management.

Check out the full note from Libra:

We observe with surprise the attitude of Flamengo Regatta Club, on one hand, requesting secrecy of justice in a lawsuit and, on the other, disclosing to the press selected and distorted information, even leading part of the specialized press to error and spreading misinformation.

Given this attitude, LiBRA, in its commitment to transparency, dialogue, and the strengthening of Brazilian football, presents some fundamental clarifications between what is true and what is false within the statements made by the club.

1. It is false to say that Flamengo wants dialogue. It was Flamengo who interrupted the dialogue, with an injunction without urgency, obstructing the cash flow of the other Libra clubs, with the aim of economically pressuring them, and without these even having been heard in the process. An act that contradicts the associative spirit and is the exact opposite of dialogue. LiBRA represents the collective will of its members to build a robust and sustainable future league for Brazilian football in search of solutions that benefit everyone and not just Flamengo.

2. It is false that the LiBRA Statute is silent on the criteria for distribution of audience revenues. The rule for the distribution of revenue collectively negotiated by LiBRA is described in the Statute. It was approved at the General Assembly. Unanimously. Including by Flamengo itself. And without reservations. Therefore, it is also false that the Club did not agree with the way of determining the audience described in the LiBRA Statute.

3. Registration is not audience, and it is false that Flamengo wants to respect the decision of the other clubs. Dissatisfied with the audience criterion provided for in the LiBRA Statute, Flamengo proposed that the metric be changed by the number of fan registrations. Registration is not audience, and does not fit and is not even mentioned in the criterion provided for in the Statute. The proposal to change the audience calculation to registration that Flamengo publicly and judicially defends was put to a vote at the LiBRA General Assembly and was rejected by the other eight Serie A clubs members of LiBRA. Considering that it was only Flamengo itself who voted in favor and sought via court to reverse the collegial decision, it is false that the club is not seeking a "table turn" through justice.

4. It is false to say that the LiBRA Statute ensures a "minimum guaranteed value" in favor of Flamengo. Any guaranteed minimum would only be applicable for the benefit of all Clubs if Libra were to become the organizer of the Championship. We assume that Flamengo knows that the Brazilian Championship Serie A is organized by CBF and that, therefore, such "guarantee" does not apply at present

5. It is false that Flamengo voted against the change of rules. The exact opposite happened. Flamengo was the only Club that proposed the amendment of the Statute to replace the audience criterion for the criterion of One proposal that was evaluated and rejected by all the other Serie A voting Clubs.

6. It is false Flamengo's claim that it would need to use an injunction to avoid losses. The current contract has a term of five years and comprises more than R$ 6 billion for the benefit of all its Clubs. Sufficient amount and enough time for any eventual recomposition could be carried out in case of a unanimous vote for change in any of the revenue distribution rules. It is impossible for Flamengo to suffer a loss.

It is worth remembering that, if Flamengo really has an interest in dialoguing for an agreement, or is convinced that it is right, the Club itself would not make use of an unnecessary injunction, and would discuss whether it is right on the merits in Mediation or Arbitration.

Why are we having to clarify all these doubts through press releases and not in a technical environment and within Libra itself? Why did Flamengo prefer this path instead of keeping the discussion internally?

Flamengo shows that there are other objectives in its movements.

Questioning the facts and distorting them to gain media support based on misinformation is wanting to live a parallel reality, of economic imposition, without any collective foundation. An antiquated and solitary vision.

Collective marketing blocks, like Libra and like the LFU, or a League, when formed, will represent everything that Flamengo appears to oppose at this moment: collective negotiation of rights, expansion of value and revenue, product quality development and internationalization.

Together the clubs are not worth more, they are worth much more.

Separated the clubs are not only worth less, they also destroy the value in the entire business chain that surrounds and is part of football.

Instead of working for the future of Brazilian football, we are here stuck to an old and repetitive discussion about who earns more - and about who wants to earn even more -, while important matters remain on the sidelines of the debate.

LiBRA has absolute respect for the Flamengo institution, for its emblematic history, for its many achievements and, mainly, for its fans - those who deserve the Brazilian football that Flamengo refuses to build. However, it also has the same respect for all its other members, all the clubs of Brazilian football and all its millions of passionate fans.

Brazilian football does not have an owner.

It has millions.

It has 212 million owners.

Next Palmeiras games

São Paulo x Palmeiras – Brazilian Championship – 5/10 (Sunday), 16h (Brasília time)

Palmeiras x Juventude – Brazilian Championship – 11/10 (Saturday), 19h (Brasília time)

This article was translated into English by Artificial Intelligence. You can read the original version in 🇧🇷 here.