Vinicius Junior was again Real Madrid’s goalscoring hero on the Champions League stage last night but his role in the victory over Benfica was overshadowed by allegations of racism.
It was claimed that Benfica midfielder Gianluca Prestianni had used discriminatory language towards Vinicius in the aftermath of his goal celebrations, covering his mouth to hide what was said.
That led to a 10-minute interruption at the Estadio da Luz, with referee Francois Letexier crossing his arms to signal that racist abuse had been reported by Vinicius.
Both Prestianni and Benfica have vehemently denied the allegations but the matter will now be the subject of a UEFA investigation as the two clubs prepare to meet again in the return leg next week.
The Athletic examines football’s racism protocols, what happens now and the possible consequences.
What is FIFA’s in-game racism protocol and how is it implemented?
Although the Benfica-Madrid match was part of a UEFA competition, it abided by racism protocols introduced at FIFA’s congress in 2024.
Any player, team official or referee was given permission to take a stand by crossing their arms at the wrists to signal racist abuse. It was designed to be a universal gesture to empower players, recognised around the globe. All FIFA member associations adopted these new measures.
A three-step procedure follows, escalating from the halting of a match to suspending play and on to an abandonment if the abuse persists. Benfica’s game with Real Madrid on Tuesday was stopped for roughly 10 minutes by the French referee Letexier, who performed the ‘no racism’ gesture, before its eventual resumption.
The gesture was previously used by Brazilian referee Ramon Abatti during the Club World Cup match between Madrid and Mexican side Pachuca last June. Madrid defender Antonio Rudiger alleged that Gustavo Cabral had abused him, which the Pachuca captain denied, and reported the incident to Abatti. No charges relating to the incident have yet been forthcoming against Cabral.
UEFA, European football’s governing body, has had its own protocols, broadly mirroring those of FIFA, to tackle discriminatory abuse, which have been in place since 2009. These were evidenced during England’s European Championship qualifying round game away to Bulgaria in 2019, when officials threatened an abandonment after play was twice stopped due to racist abuse aimed at Tyrone Mings and Raheem Sterling.
How long does it take to investigate an allegation of in-game racism?
This is not straightforward.
The appointment of a UEFA ethics and disciplinary inspector marks the first step in a formal investigation and a team will now be tasked with compiling evidence from the two players involved, the match officials and any players who claim to have heard what was said. This may involve Madrid striker Kylian Mbappe, who told reporters after Tuesday’s match that he heard Prestianni use racist slurs.
The nature of the allegations demands that it is an in-depth process, and that points towards Prestianni being available for the tie’s second leg in Madrid next Wednesday.
Past cases handled by UEFA have broadly spanned a month, but other examples within English football have taken much longer. The suspension of Luis Suarez for eight matches in December 2011 came two months after it was alleged the Liverpool forward had racially abused Manchester United defender Patrice Evra during a game and involved a six-day hearing with the Football Association (FA). Suarez later apologised for any offence he had caused by using the Spanish word for ‘negro’ but insisted he had not done so with derogatory intent.
Luis Suarez (right) was banned for racially abusing Patrice Evra (Shaun Botterill/Getty Images)
A similar timeframe passed between Chelsea’s John Terry being charged for racially abusing Anton Ferdinand in 2012 and receiving a four-game ban from the FA. That disciplinary case followed Terry being found not guilty in an earlier criminal case at Westminster Magistrates’ Court. Terry denied the initial charge but, after being found guilty, apologised for the language he had used and did not appeal.
A more recent case in English football, involving Preston North End’s Milutin Osmajic, spanned seven months. Osmajic was found guilty on the balance of probability in November last year to have racially abused Burnley midfielder Hannibal Mejbri in a Championship fixture nine months earlier, a charge he denied. That resulted in a nine-game ban.
Benfica said in a statement on Wednesday that they will approach UEFA’s investigation with a “spirit of complete collaboration, transparency, openness and a sense of clarity”, while reiterating the club’s support for Prestianni, who they believe has been subjected to a “defamation campaign”.
What previous examples have there been? And what were the punishments handed out?
The most notable recent case in UEFA competition came during a Europa League tie in March 2021 between Scotland’s Rangers and Slavia Prague of the Czech Republic, whose defender Ondrej Kudela was accused of racist abuse towards Glen Kamara.
It was alleged by Kamara, through a statement from his lawyer, that Kudela had called him a “f***ing monkey” when leaning in towards his opponent’s ear and covering his mouth. Kudela and Slavia denied the accusation but, 26 days after the last-16 second leg fixture in which the incident occurred was played, UEFA handed out a 10-game ban to the centre-back for “racist behaviour”.
When a subsequent challenge to UEFA’s appeals board was dismissed in the May, Kudela took his case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. That was eventually withdrawn a year later. In a statement released on Slavia’s website, Kudela issued an apology. “There were emotions in the match and unfortunately I can’t take it back now,” he said. “I’m so sorry.”
The previous cases of Suarez and Terry resulted in smaller bans but recent years have seen a harder stance adopted by the game’s authorities. UEFA guidelines now state that any player found guilty of racist abuse will be suspended for a minimum of 10 games, as well as having to undergo mandatory education programmes.
The number of players found guilty of racism remains low, with the majority of discriminatory cases investigated by UEFA typically involving the conduct of supporters.
Earlier this season, Azerbaijani side Qarabag’s youth team were ordered to play one UEFA match behind closed doors, suspended for one year, due to the “racist and/or discriminatory behaviour” of fans during a Youth League fixture against Chelsea in Baku.
Why have relatively few players been found guilty?
Proving verbal allegations is reliant on clear evidence, and that is not always available to those investigating.
UEFA did not publish any written reasons in the Kudela case but it was always Kamara’s assertion that the abuse had been heard by others. As part of his statement, Kamara claimed his Rangers team-mate Bongani Zungu caught what Kudela had said and, if that was repeated to UEFA’s inspector, an eyewitness report would have carried obvious weight.
How Mbappe will respond when giving evidence to the UEFA investigation is currently unknown but he made it clear in the aftermath of last night’s game what he believed he heard. “He (Prestianni) put his shirt down here and said, ‘Monkey, monkey, monkey, monkey, monkey’. I heard him say it, and some Benfica players heard him too, and then everything you saw started,” Mbappe told reporters in the mixed zone.
Investigations have also been known to call upon lip-reading experts to give evidence. The case brought against Osmajic saw two reports prepared for a hearing by two experts and, though accepted not to be 100 per cent reliable, it was found that the Preston player had used the word “black” during his exchanges with Hannibal.
Milutin Osmajic was banned for eight games (Carl Recine/Getty Images)
Such an assessment would not be possible in the case of Prestianni, who purposely covered his mouth with his shirt during his interaction with Vinicius Jr.
UEFA’s threshold for guilt will be key.
Unlike in a criminal case, where the burden of proof falls upon those bringing the action, the FA, for example, uses a lesser bar. Its rulebook outlines that the applicable standard of proof is the “civil standard of the balance of probability”, meaning that there does not necessarily need to be wholly conclusive evidence brought forward “beyond a reasonable doubt”.
UEFA’s own disciplinary regulations say it had the “absolute discretion regarding the evaluation of evidence”, and that the “standard of proof to be applied in disciplinary proceedings is the comfortable satisfaction of the competent disciplinary body.”
What have people said about football’s anti-racism protocols?
Gianni Infantino was among the most vocal respondents to the previous night’s events. FIFA’s president said he was “shocked and saddened” by the alleged racism aimed at Vinicius and added that “there was no room for racism in our sport and society.”
“At FIFA…. we are committed to ensuring that players, officials and fans are respected and protected, and that appropriate action is taken when incidents occur,” Infantino wrote on Instagram. “I commend referee Francois Letexier for activating the anti-racism protocol by using the arm gesture to stop the game and address the situation.”
There was, though, an acceptance that FIFA could yet go further. Former France defender Mikel Silvestre, who sits on FIFA’s Voice Panel — a body formed of 16 former men’s and women’s players to advise on anti-racism initiatives — told Sky Sports News they were assessing ways of sanctioning players who cover their mouths in heated exchanges.
Vinicius Jr speaks to Jose Mourinho (Angel Martinez/Getty Images)
The immediate comments of Jose Mourinho, the Benfica head coach, were also condemned as a “form of gaslighting” by UK-based anti-discrimination group Kick It Out.
“Leaders in football have a crucial role in setting standards, and moments like these call for responsible leadership that reinforces respect, inclusion and accountability,” they said in a statement. “We look forward to a thorough investigation into this incident, with appropriate accountability linked to the outcome.”