Sergio Pellicer was sent off after 93 minutes. An action not without its controversy that the technician explains. “I never usually talk about the refereeing issue because it is a tremendously complicated job like ours, but I hope it tells the truth. The truth has only one way and the lie has very short legs. I have simply turned to the fourth official: What is happening in the second half? Are my words. I hope he tells the truth, nothing more. The refereeing issue has nothing to do with the result, far from it. It is true that in the second parre, the little invisible things of those fouls, cards … but it is no excuse. It seemed to me that it was only there was a fault in the last action (the expulsion of Benkhemassa for his entry to Curro). There were three or four fouls in our court that had also occurred in the opposite court. I think it was not being fair. We try to convey the annoyance, the situation we were living with. But nothing more. With the utmost respect because it is a tremendously difficult job. But we have to have a little common sense. The card thing can be solved with good words ”.
Below we reflect what Muñiz Ruiz explained in the minutes about the expulsion of Sergio Pellicer. “In the 90th minute the coach Pellicer Garcia, Sergio was expelled for the following reason: Repeatedly protesting to the fourth official one of our decisions, leaving his technical area several meters“Then he made an annex that we reproduce. “OTHER INCIDENTS (Technician: Sergio Pellicer Garcia) Once the game was over, he entered the field of play to the position of the refereeing team, protesting insistently, addressing us in the following terms: “Why are you kicking me out? I hope you don't lie in the minutes. A tricky wording that can mean more than one penalty game for the Malaguista coach. And more seeing how severe the Competition Committee tends to be with the coaches.
Other topics covered by Pellicer
Feeling that two points have escaped: “On the one hand yes, but the last action gives another sensation. Many times in these football games we look very short-term, but today there are many positive things in the team's game, in certain things that have been blamed on us during this start of the season ”.
Rival danger from the sides: “We will have to see and analyze it. There were shots in the first half but on the second play, some more sporadic. Their sense of danger has been that, it is true. They are actions in which we have to be a little more forceful, they are second plays. The game seemed that we could escape in a foul, a second play or a lateral send. The rest was controlled. The team played very well ”.
Change in center of defense: “There were several changes. We played a very serious game, calmly on the ball, with deep sides. The superiority in the end marks the result, and we needed to be a little more aggressive. The second goal would have changed the course of the game. La Ponfe did not lose face to the game and that means that any team or game, whatever it is, is competed to the maximum. Today we took a step forward and improved in the defensive aspect, in the circulation of the ball ”.
Hit in attack: “It is true that we lacked in the last pass but we had quite a few approaches. I think we know perfectly the characteristics of Ponferradina. We have seen two games. Then I will analyze it on the plane, but I think we have been more comfortable than the rival Very happy with the performance of my players ”.