Gianluca Pretianni has given a new direction to the disciplinary case stemming from his on-field verbal clash with Vinicius Jr. with the Benfica player denying the use of any racial slur, admitting instead that he used an anti-gay insult against the Real Madrid forward.
According to ESPN journalist Bruno Andrade, sources have indicated that Prestianni, 20, has submitted evidence stating he called Vinicius “m*ricón”, which is an anti-gay insult in Spanish, rather than “mono,” the Spanish word for “monkey,” which carries racist connotations and was the initial allegation.
The distinction could prove central as UEFA evaluates the case, though under its disciplinary code, both offences carry identical sanction frameworks.
What Happened
After finishing ninth in the UEFA Champions League (UCL) group stage, just one spot outside the automatic qualifying positions, Real Madrid were forced to battle against Benfica, in a two-legged qualifier. Interestingly, the Spanish giant's final group stage defeat that denied them automatic qualification also came against Benfica, a game which ended 4-2 courtesy a 94th minute goal scored by goalkeeper Anatoliy Trubin that ensured the Portuguese side made the play-offs courtesy a better goal-difference.
The incident in question occurred shortly after Vinicius scored the game's only goal, during the first leg of their UCL qualifier, at the Estadio da Luz, in Lisbon. Television footage showed an exchange between the Brazilian forward and Prestianni just ahead of the restart post the goal. The Argentinian is seen covering his mouth with his jersey which saying something, following which Vinicius appeared to alert match officials. The confrontation quickly escalated, drawing in players from both sides.
Real Madrid midfielder Aurélien Tchouaméni, speaking to Spanish television immediately after the match, said Prestianni had offered that same explanation (of calling Vinicius "m*aricón) when confronted by Madrid players on the pitch claiming he had used a homophobic insult rather than a racist one.
However, that version of events has been sharply contested by Kylian Mbappe, who gave a detailed account post-match and insisted he had clearly heard racist abuse directed at Vinicius.
“I heard it,” Mbappe said post the game at Lisbon. “There are Benfica players that also heard it.”
Mbappe further stated that the alleged racial slur was repeated multiple times, intensifying scrutiny around the exchange.
Regulatory Context
The case now rests with UEFA's disciplinary committee. Article 14 of UEFA's Disciplinary Regulations states:
“Any entity or person subject to these regulations who insults the human dignity of a person or group of persons on whatever grounds, including skin colour, race, religion, ethnic origin, gender or sexual orientation, incurs a suspension lasting at least ten matches or a specified period of time, or any other appropriate sanction.”
Crucially, the regulation does not differentiate in minimum sanction between racist abuse and anti-gay abuse. Both fall under the same threshold, a suspension of at least ten matches or an equivalent period.
Wider Context Around Vinicius
The case carries additional weight given Vinicius' long-running battle against racist abuse in Spanish football. The Brazilian forward has previously been the target of discriminatory chanting in domestic competitions, incidents that have prompted investigations, stadium sanctions and renewed debate over enforcement standards in European football.
That history means any allegation involving the Brazilian forward is likely to draw heightened scrutiny, both from governing bodies and anti-discrimination watchdogs.
What Comes Next
UEFA's investigation will hinge on match reports, witness testimony, audio-visual evidence and player submissions. The diverging accounts, one from the accused, another from multiple Madrid players, present a factual dispute that disciplinary officials must now assess.
The regulatory framework leaves little room for nuance in terms of potential punishment. The central question is evidentiary: what was said, and can it be conclusively established?
Until UEFA issues a formal ruling, the case remains unresolved but the latest twist has shifted it from a straightforward racism allegation into a contested discrimination hearing with significant implications for both players and the competition's governance standards.
Essential Business Intelligence, Continuous LIVE TV, Sharp Market Insights, Practical Personal Finance Advice and Latest Stories — On NDTV Profit.