Real Madrid TV launch another attack on referees by presenting statistical evidence | OneFootball

Even though club football has paused for the international break, Real Madrid TV is not staying silent.

The official channel of the club continues to release content accusing referees of unfair treatment towards Los Blancos.

Through videos and reports, the channel insists that refereeing decisions are consistently biased against Real Madrid and benefit their closest rivals, Barcelona and Atletico de Madrid.

This time, the focus is not on penalties or offsides, but on the number of cards shown to different teams.

Real Madrid TV highlights that Barcelona and Atletico receive fewer punishments despite committing a similar or higher number of fouls.

Real Madrid’s numbers raise alarm

According to the club’s channel, “the balance is +7 for Barcelona and -2 for Madrid.”

This figure comes from comparing the yellow cards shown to their players versus those given to opponents. For Real Madrid, this is nothing short of a scandal.

The channel goes further, pointing out the disparity in how many fouls are needed for an opponent to be booked.

“Barça only needs 3.4 fouls in its favor for the opponent to be cautioned, while Real Madrid needs 13.4.” For them, the difference is “a real scandal” and “an insult to football.”

Suspicion over yellow cards

Another angle raised by Real Madrid TV is the number of fouls a team must commit before seeing yellow.

They underline the difference clearly – “At Barça, 11, compared to 7.3 at Madrid.”

The channel concludes its analysis with a strong claim – “something very suspicious happened last season in terms of refereeing, as the statistical anomalies in this season are also beginning to show.”

To reinforce this point, they add, “In three consecutive games, Real Madrid lost the advantage it had over Barcelona.”

Real Madrid TV has once again made its stance clear that they believe refereeing in La Liga continues to favour their biggest rivals, and the figures they share are meant to back that argument.