Pinto da Costa remembers Calabote and Bruno Paixao and talks about the “Hugo Miguel Championship”

The FC Porto president used history to point his finger at one of last season’s referees again مرة

In the week he was suspended for 21 days by the disciplinary board for his criticism of refereeing – in a match with Braga in the Portuguese Cup semi-final – that was exactly the topic highlighted in Thursday’s episode. From “The Paradoxes of Fate”. The year in question was 2000, but the leader of the dragons has bridged the gap to the present. “

Periodically, there is refereeing that marks the tournament. Just as 1959 is still known today as the Calaboot Championship, the year 2000 was Bruno Paixao’s championship. We went to play in Campo Mayor and the refereeing was so indescribable that even today we are talking about Bruno Paixao. It was amazing and biased. As the 2021 championship will forever remain the championship of Hugo Miguel. He stressed that they are referees so well established that they represent the history of the tournament itself, “noting that in this match against Campomaurens, this was the” first and only time” that he saw Fernando Santos “lose his head with a referee”. Without forgetting the tie referee in Morernency (1- 1), a match in which he claimed three penalty kicks.

For Pinto da Costa, it is “difficult” to deal with these situations because, as he complained, “the 25th of April has not come yet in football, there is no freedom of expression”. “And we have to remember, as Dr. Mario Soares said, that in certain situations, people have a legitimate right to be indignant,” he added, stressing that he was not afraid to speak out, despite lawsuits and arrests. “I’m talking about facts, I don’t make valuable judgments about people or their intentions. Saying that Hugo Miguel didn’t score three clear penalties, everyone said, is a fact. And that’s infuriating. and the right to show indignation when things do not go right. There are still people from the past with a reactionary mindset who do not accept that others, at liberty, can express their opinions.” .