Nationally, in the sports world, Pablo López’s arbitration continues to be questioned in the match between Sport Huancayo and Sports University. And, the annulled goal of Alex Valera by an offside to José Caravalí, has raised controversy.
Comments have been heard for and against and from the creams, the administrator of the “U”, Franco Velazco, informed that he would file a complaint with the CONAR. On the subject, Correo spoke with one of the protagonists of said meeting, the DT of Red Matador, Richard Pellejero.
The arbitration generated a lot of controversy, what do you think about it?
Let’s see (above) arbitration, I always say the same, I feel that they are human are wrong for both sides. Then we have been, throughout the Opening Tournament, I believe that we were more harmed than favored. So, if this time he had to harm him, he doesn’t seem bad either.
The lack of ancajima to Herrera was brutal and did not get any card how did the squad felt?
Yes, I believe that the lack of ancajima was expulsion, but, totally convinced. They even saw it, there I told the referee to check it, but not even reviewed it, he did not even take out the yellow card and they do not speak, they only talk about the canceled goal and they did not charge the abuse, supposedly, that the goal was more than that expulsion. Each team talks about the things that harm him, but not what favors him.
After the tie, Franco Velazco said that University will raise, I no longer claim but, complain about arbitration What do you think of that attitude?
I repeat you again, if the U is going to complain about this game then we have to complain every weekend huh. Unfortunately, these things happen, to the teams called “boys” it happens much more and when the big teams feel, because I do not know if they were harmed, but they feel obviously harmed that a larger controversy is generated because they have that power and passes anywhere. So, I believe that today the U can grab that, but hey, if so we will have to start complaining every weekend.
Do you feel that Sunday’s result was just before University?
Let’s see, I think the result was fair, I think we had fifteen minutes of the first half and comes to pick up the game in which we are not. Even, they had a couple of chances more and then the encounter was more even. Maybe they had the clearest chances, yes, we also had them. Apart the goal came fairly.
What was missing red to win?
Let’s see, I think that taking advantage of the few chances we had, maybe we had to have been more accurate, we had to have been more concrete. I believe that, at the last of the game, the last minutes they already had a chance and we of the backlash were able to liquidate them, but hey, it was also understood that fatigue came to the players and then when deciding in that final part it cost us a little. I think we lacked more than anything the last quarter of the court to settle the game.
