Osasuna has officially filed an appeal against FC Barcelona's acquittal in the case involving Iñigo Martínez. The defender played in the match against Osasuna on March 27, despite allegedly not being eligible to play. The Catalans seemed to have escaped punishment, but Osasuna is not accepting that outcome.
Embed from Getty Images
Osasuna has officially filed an appeal against the decision to acquit FC Barcelona in the controversial case involving Iñigo Martínez, a development that has reignited debate over player eligibility and regulatory enforcement in Spanish football.
The issue stems from the La Liga match held on March 27, in which Barcelona hosted Osasuna at the Estadi Olímpic Lluís Companys and secured a dominant 3-0 victory. Central to the dispute is the participation of Iñigo Martínez, who had recently left the Spanish national team camp prematurely, citing medical reasons.
Osasuna contends that Martínez’s involvement in the match violated established rules that govern player availability following international call-ups. The club insists that according to FIFA regulations, players who withdraw from national team duty due to injury or medical concerns are not allowed to play for their club teams during the same window. This rule is intended to prevent abuse of medical exemptions and to protect the integrity of international call-ups. Osasuna argues that Martínez, having exited the national setup under the pretense of medical unavailability, should have been ineligible for Barcelona’s squad against them.
The Spanish Football Federation (RFEF) initially dismissed Osasuna’s complaint, determining that there was no sufficient basis to punish Barcelona or to challenge the result of the match. However, Osasuna did not accept that ruling and proceeded to file an official appeal, escalating the matter in hopes of overturning the decision. The Pamplona-based club issued a sharply worded statement following the rejection, expressing strong disapproval of the process and accusing the federation of failing to conduct a thorough review.
In their appeal, Osasuna placed significant emphasis on the lack of transparency surrounding Martínez’s medical clearance. They questioned whether his withdrawal from international duty was genuinely based on medical necessity or strategically motivated to ensure his availability for Barcelona. The club pointed out that Barcelona’s medical report, which was meant to justify the player’s condition, was submitted unusually late and lacked essential supporting documentation, including additional medical tests that are typically expected in such situations.
Moreover, Osasuna alleged that the RFEF did not carry out its own independent medical evaluation, instead relying solely on Barcelona’s account without any further scrutiny. According to the club, this failure allowed key details about the player's health and eligibility to remain ambiguous and unresolved. They argue that this approach undermines the objectivity of the process and sets a concerning precedent for future cases involving player withdrawals from national team duties.
A particularly sensitive aspect of Osasuna’s argument involves the lack of any explicit approval from the national team or the federation allowing Martínez to return to domestic competition. The club stressed that no formal green light was given to Barcelona to field the player and noted that none of the official communications provided any indication that such permission had been granted. This, they claim, constitutes a clear breach of protocol.
To further illustrate their commitment to following the rules, Osasuna referenced the case of their own player, Bryan Zaragoza. Despite the potential drawbacks of losing an important player, Osasuna complied with international call-up requirements and sent Zaragoza to the national team training camp. They argue that failing to do so would have violated regulations, thereby highlighting the inconsistency in how Martínez’s situation was handled.
Adding fuel to the fire, FC Barcelona responded to the accusations by labeling Osasuna’s concerns as “inappropriate,” a reaction that was met with fierce criticism from the Pamplona club. Osasuna fired back, calling the response “cynical and empty,” and reaffirmed their belief that they are justified in raising questions based on the factual inconsistencies and procedural flaws in the case. According to them, the appeal is not just about a single match or player, but about defending the principles of fairness and accountability in the league.
Osasuna's ultimate objective is to have the result of the March 27 match overturned and replaced with a forfeit victory in their favor. Such a decision would be rare but not unprecedented, and would mark a significant moment in Spanish football jurisprudence. The club argues that enforcing the regulations uniformly is essential for maintaining the credibility of the competition and avoiding a situation where powerful clubs can bypass rules without consequence.
This case could potentially open the door to broader discussions within Spanish football and beyond about how federations manage medical exemptions, enforce FIFA guidelines, and respond to potential regulatory violations. The outcome of the appeal, which may take several weeks, is eagerly awaited by clubs, players, and fans alike, and it could have lasting implications on how similar disputes are handled in the future.
As the situation continues to unfold, it is clear that Osasuna is not backing down. The club has vowed to pursue every available avenue to ensure that their concerns are taken seriously and that what they see as a procedural injustice is addressed. Whether or not their appeal will be successful remains to be seen, but one thing is certain: this is a story far from over.
Updated: 04:26, 11 Apr 2025
