Brazilian clubs accuse Flamengo of 'twisting facts' in joint statement 📝 | OneFootball

Libra (Brazilian Football League) issued an official statement this Friday (3rd), accusing Flamengo of spreading "selected and distorted information" to the press.

Currently, Libra is composed of ABC, Atlético-MG, Bahia, Brusque, Flamengo, Grêmio, Guarani, Palmeiras, Paysandu, Red Bull Bragantino, Sampaio Corrêa, Santos, São Paulo, and Vitória.

According to the organization, the recent stance of Flamengo's board contradicts the desire for dialogue expressed by the club itself.

In the statement, Libra rebuts, point by point, Flamengo's justifications for the lawsuit that blocked the transfer of funds to the other league members.

The organization also claims that it was Flamengo who "interrupted the dialogue" with an injunction, aiming to economically pressure the other clubs.

Libra alleges that it is false to claim the statute is silent about the methodology for distributing revenue by audience and highlights that the current rule was approved unanimously at the General Assembly, including Flamengo's own favorable vote, without reservations.

According to the organization, Flamengo's proposal to change the metric to "number of registered fans" was put to a vote and rejected by all the other eight Serie A clubs in the league, resulting in a score of 8 to 1 against the idea.

For the organization, Flamengo's pursuit of judicial means after losing the vote characterizes an attempt at a "table-turning".

Libra further raised the tone by questioning the club's "real intentions": "Why did Flamengo choose this path instead of keeping the discussion internal? Flamengo shows that there are other objectives behind its actions."

For the organization, the stance of the Rio club represents an "outdated and solitary vision" that goes against the collectivity needed to strengthen Brazilian football.

At the end of the note, Libra states that Flamengo's fans "deserve the Brazilian football that Flamengo refuses to build" and that the sport in Brazil has "212 million owners" and not just one.

📜 Read Libra's official statement in full

"We observe with surprise the stance of Clube de Regatas do Flamengo, which, on the one hand, requests judicial secrecy in a lawsuit and, on the other, discloses selected and distorted information to the press, even leading part of the specialized media into error and spreading misinformation.

In view of this stance, LiBRA, committed to transparency, dialogue, and the strengthening of Brazilian football, presents some fundamental clarifications about what is true and what is false in the statements made by the club.

1. It is false to claim that Flamengo wants dialogue. It was Flamengo who interrupted the dialogue, with an unnecessary injunction, obstructing the cash flow of the other Libra clubs, with the aim of economically pressuring them, and without these clubs even being heard in the process. This act 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, not just Flamengo.

2. It is false that the LiBRA Statute is silent about the criteria for distributing audience revenue. The rule for distributing 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 to say that the club did not agree with the method of determining audience as 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 in the LiBRA Statute, Flamengo proposed that the metric be changed to the number of registered fans. Registration is not audience, and it does not fit nor is it mentioned in the criterion provided in the Statute. The proposal to change the audience calculation to registration, which Flamengo defends publicly and in court, was put to a vote at the LiBRA General Assembly and was rejected by the other eight Serie A clubs in LiBRA. Considering that only Flamengo itself voted in favor and sought judicial means to overturn the collegiate decision, it is false to say that the club is not seeking a “table-turning” through the courts.

4. It is false to claim that the LiBRA Statute guarantees a “minimum guaranteed amount” in Flamengo's favor. Any minimum guarantee would only be applicable for the benefit of all clubs if Libra were to become the organizer of the Championship. We suppose Flamengo knows that the Campeonato Brasileiro Série A is organized by the CBF and, therefore, such a “guarantee” does not apply at present.

5. It is false that Flamengo voted against changing the rules. Exactly the opposite happened. Flamengo was the only club that proposed amending the Statute to replace the audience criterion with the registration criterion. A proposal that was evaluated and rejected by all the other voting Serie A clubs.

6. Flamengo's claim that it needed to use an injunction to avoid losses is false. The current contract is valid for five years and provides more than R$ 6 billion in benefits to all its clubs. This amount and timeframe are sufficient for any eventual recomposition to be made in case of a unanimous vote to change any of the revenue distribution rules. It is impossible for Flamengo to suffer a loss.

It is worth remembering that, if Flamengo is truly interested in negotiating an agreement, or is convinced it is right, the club itself would not use an unnecessary injunction and would discuss the merits in Mediation or Arbitration.

Why do we have to clarify all these doubts through press releases and not in a technical environment and within Libra itself? Why did Flamengo choose this path instead of keeping the discussion internal?

Flamengo shows that there are other objectives behind its actions.

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

Collective marketing blocs, such as Libra and LFU, or a League when formed, will represent everything that Flamengo seems to oppose at this moment: collectivity in negotiations, increased value and revenue, product quality development, and internationalization.

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

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

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

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

Brazilian football does not have one owner.

It has millions.

It has 212 million owners."

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

📸 Wagner Meier - 2019 Getty Images