The LaLiga president responded on social media after it was reported that the CSD was studying whether to act on its own initiative following his comparison of the communication methods used by Real Madrid and its television channel with propaganda techniques associated with Joseph Goebbels, Nazi Germany’s minister of propaganda.
“I cannot believe the news that the CSD is studying whether to act on its own initiative because of my statements. If this is confirmed, I hope that the examination begins by reading what I wrote and reviewing some precedents,” Tebas posted on X.
He argued that his comments had been misrepresented. Tebas had said the comparison concerned communication methods rather than Nazi ideology or Real Madrid supporters, and he repeated that distinction in his response.
His original remarks accused Madrid’s leadership and media operation of repeatedly selecting incidents that supported its grievances, encouraging suspicion and presenting the club as a victim. He said the approach recalled propaganda techniques built around repetition, the creation of an enemy and the subordination of facts to a predetermined narrative.
Real Madrid reacted strongly, issuing a statement on 16 October demanding Tebas’s immediate resignation as both LaLiga president and vice-president of the Spanish Football Federation. The club described his remarks as intolerable and incompatible with the neutrality and impartiality expected of someone holding senior positions in Spanish football.
Tebas countered by pointing to comments made by Madrid president Florentino Pérez at a press conference in May. Pérez had said that Madrid could have won 14 league titles but that others had been “stolen”, and also questioned the continuity of referees in relation to the Negreira case.
Tebas asked why those comments should be treated differently from his own. He noted that referees had complained and that a report by AS on 21 September said an investigator had proposed archiving a separate disciplinary case, citing freedom of expression.
“The question is specific: what criteria are being used to assess one set of statements and another?” Tebas wrote.
“Does saying that championships have been stolen fall within freedom of expression, while criticising propaganda methods — while expressly clarifying that the comparison is not about ideology or the supporters — warrant intervention on the CSD’s own initiative?”
He acknowledged that the procedures and responsibilities involved might differ, but insisted that institutions should apply their standards consistently.
“Let what I actually wrote be read, let the criteria be explained and let them be applied independently. Freedom of expression cannot depend on the surname of the person speaking,” he concluded.
The dispute intensified after Madrid’s public demand for Tebas to leave his posts. The reported CSD consideration remained just that at the time of his response: a possible intervention, not a confirmed disciplinary decision.