The confrontation between Manu Carreño and Clos Gómez
Spanish football is going through a moment of great tension around video-arbitrage (VAR). This technology came with the promise of reducing arbitral errors and ensuring justice in sport, but today, March 25, 2025, it continues to generate disputes that divide fans, journalists and sports professionals. The recent exchange of views between journalist Manu Carreño, presenter of El Larguero in the SER Chain, and Carlos Clos Gómez, a former and current manager of the VAR in Spain, has revived a debate that seems to have no end to the system’s failures, its implementation and how the public perceives it. This dialogue, which has become viral, not only reflects the frustrations accumulated around VAR, but also highlights the complexity of its application and the often unrealistic expectations it generates. Below is a detailed analysis of this episode, its implications and the current state of the debate on arbitral technology in Spain.
Context of the confrontation
The confrontation took place on March 24, 2025, during an issue of El Larguero, in the context of an interview with Clos Gómez. He went to the program to talk about the criticisms of the VAR, after a series of controversial decisions in recent LaLiga and the F League matches. One of the incidents that lit the controversy was the goal annulled to the FC Barcelona feminine in the Classic against Real Madrid on 23 March. This move was invalidated by an alleged out-of-play that the images did not confirm clearly, and because of the lack of VAR in the female competition, it could not be revised. This episode, together with errors in male parties, such as the annulled goal to Lewandowski in November 2024 (Real Sociedad-FC Barcelona) and the constant complaints of Real Madrid on arbitration, had intensified the debate.
Manu Carreño, known for his direct style, questioned Clos Gómez about how it was possible that the referees in the VOR room (Video Operation Room) would not see played that, according to him, “50 million Spanish and Spanish see clearly”. The journalist expressed a frustration that many fans share: if the VAR is designed to correct obvious errors, why do failures still occur that seem obvious from the viewer’s perspective? Clos Gómez, for his part, defended the complexity of arbitral work, even with technology, and launched a response that turned viral: “I encourage you to be a football match.” This phrase, interpreted by some as a challenge and by others as an arrogant defense, unleashed an avalanche of reactions on social and media networks, becoming the center of a wider analysis on the VAR.
The exchange: Detail and analysis
The dialogue between Carreño and Clos Gómez shows us two very different perspectives on the VAR:
The Critique of Manu Carreño:
Carreño argues that the VAR, instead of eliminating obvious errors, often intensifies the sense of injustice. Your key question — “How is it possible that the VAR referees will not see what we all see?” — reveals a disconnection between the VOR room and the amateur experience, something that is amplified by the constant repetition of plays on television and social networks. This opinion resonates with the idea that the VAR, far from being a definitive solution, adds new layers of subjectivity and confusion. Carreño also mentioned concrete examples, such as the annulled goal to the female Barça, to show how the lack of proper use of the VAR perpetuates errors that the public considers avoidable.
The defense of Clos Gómez:
For his part, Clos Gómez, with his experience as an arbitrator and his current role, highlighted the complexity of the arbitration in real time. “It is not easy to pit certain plays, not even with the VAR,” he said, emphasizing that decisions require interpreting rules under pressure and with limited angles, even with technology. His invitation to “put a party” not only sought to defend his colleagues, but also to humanize a work which, according to him, is misinterpreted by those who criticize from outside. Clos Gómez stressed that the VAR does not seek to achieve “zero error”—an expectation that he considers unrealistic from the beginning—but to reduce the clear and evident judgments, keeping the field referee as the protagonist.
The clash between the two was not just a personal confrontation, but reflected the gap between the expectations of the public and the operational reality of the VAR. Carreño became the voice of the amateur, while Clos Gómez defended the complexity of the arbitration.cionado frustrado; Clos Gómez, that of the professional who asks empathy and understanding towards an imperfect system.
Reactions and virality
The exchange spread quickly on platforms like X, where terms like “VAR”, “Clos Gómez” and “Manu Carreño” became a trend on March 25, 2025. The reactions were divided into three large blocks:
- Support to Carreño: Many users, especially fans of clubs who feel injured by the VAR (such as Real Madrid or Barcelona), applauded the journalist’s criticism. Posts like “Manu saying what we all think: the VAR is a disaster” or “Clos Gómez inviting us to beep when they don’t see the obvious” reflected widespread discontent.
- Defense of Clos GómezOthers, including some ex-arbiters and analysts, backed the VAR head. “Arbitration is not as easy as seeing it on the couch with 20 repetitions,” one user wrote, while another noted: “Clos is right, the VAR helps, but it is not magic.”
- Ironic tone: A third group opted for humor, with memes and comments like “I’m going to be pitting a game to see if I see the outside game that Clos didn’t see” or “Clos Gomez saying ‘piten you’ as if we were to fix the VAR.”
The media like AS, Marca and El Confidencial have intensified the debate, using headlines such as “The confrontation between Carreño and Clos Gómez that lights Spanish football” or “Clos Gómez challenges Carreño: ‘Pita un partido’. The virality of this episode revealed the passion generated by the topic and its importance in the football culture of Spain.
Background discussion: VAR failures and their implementation
The clash between Carreño and Clos Gómez is not only an isolated incident, but represents another chapter in a discussion that has been underway for years. Since the introduction of the VAR in LaLiga in the 2018-2019 season, it has been both a lifeguard and a source of controversy. We will break down the key points of this debate:
- Expectations vs. Reality:
When it was introduced, the VAR was presented as the ultimate solution for the arbitrators’ mistakes, a tool that promised to bring absolute justice to football. However, Clos Gómez has pointed out on several occasions—as in this interview—that “those who had arbitrated knew that the polemic would increase.” Technology does not eliminate human interpretation, and subjective situations (such as faults or hands) continue to generate controversies, while objective decisions (such as gambling) depend on the quality of images and the accuracy of the semi-automatic system. - Persistent errors:
Cases such as the annulled goal to Lewandowski in 2024, where the boot noted as an advance generated many doubts, or the recent female Classic, show that the VAR does not always correct the obvious errors and sometimes makes them worse. The lack of transparency — such as the failure to publicize the audios of the conversations between arbitrators in real time — only fuels mistrust. For example, Real Madrid has publicly denounced an “arbitrary persecution” and is calling for deep reforms, including the departure of Clos Gómez and Medina Cantalejo from the Technical Committee of Arbitros (CTA). - Uneven implementation:
The lack of VAR in the F League, except in the final stages of competitions such as the Champions League, highlights a clear difference with its implementation in Male LaLiga, which has led to criticism of inequality. Clos Gómez commented that “the organizers choose the tools,” but also acknowledged that “we would love to arbitrate with the best technology.” This imbalance reinforces the idea that female football is falling behind in resources. - Subjectivity and media pressure:
The VAR does not act in a vacuum. The pressure of the media, social media and clubs plays a crucial role in how their decisions are interpreted. As Eduardo Iturralde González mentioned in El Larguero, “the media noise is intensified when the big teams face it.” In 2025, with Real Madrid, Barcelona and Atlético in a competition challenged by LaLiga, each error of the VAR is amplified, feeding conspiracy theories that Clos Gómez described as “unfair”.
Data and statistics
The CTA has supported the use of VAR with specific data. For example, in the 2021-2022 season, the accuracy in the penalties reached 97.45% after the reviews, and an intervention was recorded every 2.44 matches. Even so, the margin of error remains present: in 2020, it was estimated that the VAR did not act properly in 6 of the 156 revised plays. Although the system has managed to reduce simulations (about 37% less since its implementation) and has reduced serious errors, the sense of injustice remains latent when faults occur at key times.
Implications and future
The Carreño-Clos Gómez confrontation transcends verbal exchange and raises questions about the future of the VAR in Spain:
- System reform: Clubs like Real Madrid are asking for important changes, ranging from the departure of the current leaders to the implementation of a more transparent VAR, including public audios in the style of the Premier League.
- Fan education: Clos Gómez and the CTA emphasize that the audience needs to grasp the limitations of VAR. His phrase “pitar un partido” might be seen as a call for empathy, but the challenging tone didn’t really help how it was received.
- Advanced technology: The semi-automatic game, which has been implemented in LaLiga since 2024, promises to offer greater precision. However, he has already had some flaws, such as the one that occurred in the Celta-Alavés party of August 2024. This makes us think that achieving technological perfection is still a challenge.
Conclusion
The debate on the VAR in Spanish football, which intensified after the clash between Manu Carreño and Clos Gómez, reflects the passion and expectations of this sport. Carreño shared the frustration of millions of fans who see in the VAR a promise that has not been fulfilled; for his part, Clos Gómez defended the complexity of a task that mixes technology and human judgment under pressure. Both have a point: the VAR has made progress in sports justice, but its imperfect implementation and the lack of clear communication keep it at the center of the controversy. While Spanish football does not achieve a balance between technology, transparency and acceptance that humans can err, the polemic will remain as relevant as goals. This viral episode will not put an end to the debate, but will certainly keep it alive, feeding the passion of a hobby that, with or without VAR, will never stop arguing.
