Difference-in-differences per match, q = 0.27: inconclusive
Notable referee × club deviations
0
out of 1,325 pairs tested, after correction
Dated events
49
As of 2 October 2026
Key takeaways
0 notable referee × club deviations after correction, out of 1,325 pairs tested (2000-01 → 2025-26).See
Barça against the control group, points − expected: −0.111 per match between "during" (2001-18) and "after" (2018-26), q = 0.27: inconclusive.See
Adjusted fouls and yellows: raw p 0.02 and 0.08, but q = 0.08 and 0.24 after correction: inconclusive.See
A referee × club pair has a median of 11 matches: only deviations of about ±1.57 points per match were detectable.See
Compared with Real Madrid, the fouls and yellow-card balance moved notably after 2018 (q < 0.001 – 0.04): Barça's advantage shrank while Real Madrid's grew. This is not the case against the control group (q = 0.08 to 0.27). Playing style, VAR (2018-19) and the end of the payments coincide and cannot be separated.See
No referee prosecuted as of 2 October 2026; payments from 2001 to 2018.See
Status of the proceedings as of 2 October 2026: As of 1 September 2026 (EFE via Infobae; The Objective), the case is still at the investigation stage (instrucción) before Barcelona Investigating Court No. 1 (Juzgado de Instrucción n.º 1; Judge Alejandra Gil Lima): the judge refused a further extension requested by Real Madrid and supported by the Public Prosecutor's Office, but the investigation phase will not be closed before two witness statements scheduled for 13 November 2026, and an appeal concerning investigative measures remains pending before the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial). Full timeline
Keep in mind: Everyone mentioned is presumed innocent; a statistical deviation is not proof. VAR arrives in 2018-19, the same season the payments end. All limitations
Context
Between 2001 and 2018, FC Barcelona paid money to companies linked to José María Enríquez Negreira, then vice-president of the referees' committee (CTA). The Spanish courts are investigating the case; no referee is being prosecuted.
Established facts, court decisions, allegations and ongoing proceedings are kept apart; each event links to its sources.
Frequently asked questions
Who is Negreira?
José María Enríquez Negreira is a former referee who was vice-president of the RFEF's Technical Committee of Referees (CTA) until 2018. Companies linked to him received payments from FC Barcelona. See the sourced timeline.
What is the Negreira case?
Between 2001 and 2018, FC Barcelona paid money to companies linked to José María Enríquez Negreira, then vice-president of the referees' committee (CTA). The Spanish courts are investigating the case; no referee is being prosecuted. The site compares those years with refereeing data, without presuming anything.
What period do the payments cover?
From 2001 to 2018. The site compares three periods: before (2000-01), during (2001-02 → 2017-18) and after (2018-19 → 2025-26); see the statistics by period.
Is there a conviction or a trial date?
As of 2 October 2026, there has been no conviction and the case is still at the investigation stage: As of 1 September 2026 (EFE via Infobae; The Objective), the case is still at the investigation stage (instrucción) before Barcelona Investigating Court No. 1 (Juzgado de Instrucción n.º 1; Judge Alejandra Gil Lima): the judge refused a further extension requested by Real Madrid and supported by the Public Prosecutor's Office, but the investigation phase will not be closed before two witness statements scheduled for 13 November 2026, and an appeal concerning investigative measures remains pending before the Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial). The dated details are under "Status of the proceedings".
Has any referee been charged?
No. As of 2 October 2026, no referee is being prosecuted in this case; everyone mentioned is presumed innocent.
Do the data show that referees favoured Barcelona?
No referee × club deviation remains notable after correction for multiple testing (1,325 pairs tested). These tests have limited power: with a median of 11 matches, only deviations of about ±1.57 points per match could be detected. Over the payment period, the only signals concern fouls and yellow cards (raw p 0.02 and 0.08); they do not survive the correction (q = 0.08 and 0.24). Compared with Real Madrid, the fouls and yellow-card balance moved notably after 2018 (q < 0.001 – 0.04): Barça's advantage shrank while Real Madrid's grew. This is not the case against the control group (q = 0.08 to 0.27). Playing style, VAR (2018-19) and the end of the payments coincide and cannot be separated. See the verdicts
Where does the data come from?
Scores and odds from football-data.co.uk, referees and cards from Zenodo (BeSoccer) and Wikipedia, cross-checked; everything can be downloaded from the Data page and the method is published in the methodology.
Timeline
49 events shown
1994
Established fact
Negreira becomes vice-president of the CTA
Institutional
José María Enríquez Negreira, a former referee, served as vice-president of the Comité Técnico de Árbitros (CTA), the RFEF body responsible for refereeing, from 1994 to 2018, under the presidency of Victoriano Sánchez Arminio. The CTA's duties include assessing referees and deciding on promotions and relegations between categories.
According to the complaint filed by the Public Prosecutor's Office (Fiscalía), FC Barcelona began in 2001 to pay sums to companies linked to Negreira (mainly Dasnil 95 SL, as well as Nilsad SCP). The payments continued under the presidencies of Gaspart, Laporta, Rosell and Bartomeu.
For 2016-2018, the reported amounts are: Dasnil 95 SL (Negreira's company) approximately €1.39 million (€532,728 in 2016, €541,752 in 2017, €318,200 in 2018); Nilsad SCP, a single payment of €50,000 in 2016; Soccercam SL, a company belonging to his son Javier Enríquez, €450,120 invoiced to the club.
The club stopped its payments in 2018, at the time of Negreira's departure from the CTA. Former president Josep Maria Bartomeu has stated that he ended them to cut costs. The exact month of the last payment varies between sources (May or June 2018).
After his election as RFEF president in May 2018, Luis Rubiales announced the replacement of the CTA leadership (Sánchez Arminio and his team, including Negreira). Carlos Velasco Carballo became CTA president.
According to press reports published in February 2023, in February 2019, after the payments had stopped, Negreira sent a letter to Josep Maria Bartomeu referring to possible revelations about club "irregularities". The exact content of these irregularities has not been established.
The Spanish Tax Agency (Hacienda) opened an audit of FC Barcelona covering corporate income tax (2015-2018) and VAT (2015-2017), during which the invoices from Negreira's companies came to light. This audit is the origin of the criminal case.
Heard by the Tax Agency in October 2021, Negreira stated, according to documents reported by the press, that the club wanted "everything to be neutral" and described his work as technical refereeing analyses. According to the press, the Tax Agency indicated that it could not establish that these payments had influenced referee appointments or results.
The programme "Què t'hi jugues" on Cadena SER Catalunya revealed that the Public Prosecutor's Office was investigating payments of approximately €1.4 million made by FC Barcelona to Dasnil 95 SL between 2016 and 2018, while Negreira was vice-president of the CTA.
The club acknowledged the payments and stated that it had paid an external consultant for video reports on young players and technical reports on professional refereeing intended for the coaching staff, a practice it presented as common. It denied any attempt to influence referees.
LaLiga invokes the sporting statute of limitations
Sporting
LaLiga president Javier Tebas stated that no sporting disciplinary sanction was possible because the facts were time-barred (three-year limitation period), while considering that such facts should not occur. The criminal route remains separate.
LaLiga's executive committee, backed by almost all the clubs, described the case as extremely serious, said it had passed information to the Public Prosecutor's Office and undertook to act within the scope of its legal powers.
Referee Xavier Estrada Fernández filed a complaint for sporting corruption against Negreira, his son and Dasnil 95 SL. It was later admitted by the court together with that of the Public Prosecutor's Office.
LaLiga announces it will join the proceedings as a party
Institutional
Javier Tebas announced that LaLiga would join the proceedings as a party (acusación), considering that the reputation of the competition takes precedence over that of any club.
The Barcelona Public Prosecutor's Office filed a complaint against FC Barcelona (as a legal entity), former presidents Sandro Rosell and Josep Maria Bartomeu, former executives Òscar Grau and Albert Soler, and Negreira, for private-to-private corruption in sport (continuing offence), unfair administration (administración desleal) and falsification of commercial documents (falsedad en documento mercantil). According to the Fiscalía, the payments amounted to €7.3 million (2001-2018) and were made under a confidential verbal agreement aimed at favouring the club in refereeing decisions; those concerned dispute this interpretation. The complaint does not target any referee.
Real Madrid decides to join the proceedings as a party
Institutional
Real Madrid's board of directors announced its intention to join the proceedings, expressing its "deep concern". Its participation as a private prosecutor (acusación particular) was accepted in May 2023.
Barcelona Investigating Court No. 1 admits the complaint
Court proceedings
Barcelona Investigating Court No. 1 (Juzgado de Instrucción n.º 1) admitted the Public Prosecutor's Office's complaint as well as that of Xavier Estrada, accepted LaLiga as a party and assigned the criminal police investigation (policía judicial) to the Guardia Civil.
In an interview with a Slovenian daily newspaper, Aleksander Čeferin described the case as one of the most serious he had seen and stressed that, at UEFA level, the facts are not time-barred.
President Joan Laporta stated that the club had never sought to alter the competition and presented more than 600 reports and CDs intended to document the services provided.
The investigating judge named Javier Enríquez Romero, Negreira's son, as a person under investigation (investigado) and extended the investigation to money laundering, with the proceedings declared secret (secreto de sumario).
UEFA provisionally admitted FC Barcelona to the 2023-2024 European competitions and reserved a future decision on its admission or exclusion; the admissibility proceedings are suspended but may be reopened.
Judge Aguirre adds bribery of a public official (cohecho)
Court proceedings
Judge Joaquín Aguirre attributed the offence of bribery (cohecho) to FC Barcelona and the other persons under investigation, considering that Negreira performed public functions at the CTA. The Public Prosecutor's Office opposes this legal classification.
Judge Aguirre named Joan Laporta as a person under investigation for bribery (cohecho) in respect of payments made during his first term (2003-2010), considering that the limitation period had not expired. The Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office, which had left him out of its complaint, subsequently requested that the case against him be dismissed.
On the basis of a forensic medical assessment, the judge rejected the incapacity claimed by Negreira's defence (cognitive disorders) and summoned him as a person under investigation.
The Barcelona Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) ordered that the RFEF be admitted as a private prosecutor (acusación particular) in the proceedings; the federation had announced in March 2023 that it wished to join them.
Appearing as a person under investigation before the judge of Investigating Court No. 1, Negreira exercised his right not to make a statement; the hearing lasted a few minutes.
Section 21 of the Barcelona Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) upheld the appeals by the club, Negreira and his son and annulled the money-laundering line of investigation, owing to the lack of concrete evidence on where the funds went.
The Barcelona Provincial Court (Section 21), in line with the Public Prosecutor's Office and the defence, held that Negreira cannot be considered a public official, since sports federations are private entities; the offence of bribery (cohecho) was therefore ruled out.
The Barcelona Audiencia ends the proceedings against Joan Laporta: payments made during his first term (2003-2010) are held to have been time-barred since 2015 for unfair administration (administración desleal), document forgery and sports corruption.
Guardia Civil report and Negreira's wife placed under investigation
Investigation
According to a Guardia Civil report, the invoiced services are not supported by any documentary evidence beyond the invoices (an assessment by the investigators, disputed by the club). On 28 August 2024, the judge named Negreira's wife as a person under investigation for money laundering after the discovery of approximately €2.98 million in deposits deemed unjustified in her accounts (1992-2023).
According to a Guardia Civil report submitted to the judge, the total transfers from the club to companies linked to Negreira between 2001 and 2018 would amount to €8.4 million (135 transfers), compared with €7.3 million in the Public Prosecutor's Office's complaint.
New judge and extension of the investigation phase
Court proceedings
Following Judge Aguirre's retirement, Judge Alejandra Gil (Investigating Court No. 1) took over the case and extended the investigation phase (instrucción) by six months.
The Barcelona Provincial Court (Audiencia Provincial) dismissed the appeals by the club, Rosell, Bartomeu, Grau, Soler and Xavier Estrada against the extension, as the statements of the persons under investigation had not yet been taken.
Heard as persons under investigation, Sandro Rosell attributed the club's success to its squad and described the payments as consultancy; Josep Maria Bartomeu said they were inherited from previous administrations and were stopped for budgetary reasons. Both denied seeking any refereeing favours.
The club summoned as a legal entity under investigation
Court proceedings
The judge summoned FC Barcelona as a legal entity under investigation for a continuing offence of business corruption, requested the original contracts with Dasnil 95 and Nilsad (2001-2014) and called as witnesses, among others, Joan Gaspart, Joan Laporta, Luis Enrique and Ernesto Valverde.
Heard as a witness, Joan Laporta described the payments as inherited and justified by the usefulness of the reports, denied any refereeing favours and said the club had handed over 629 reports. Former coaches Luis Enrique and Ernesto Valverde said they had not seen or used these reports.
Referees point out that none of them is being prosecuted
Statement
In response to remarks by the Real Madrid president, the referees' association AESAF pointed out that no referee is under investigation or the subject of an inquiry in the case. No reliable source consulted reports any referee being prosecuted as of 2 October 2026.
Former president Joan Gaspart (2000-2003), heard as a witness, stated that the club had committed no illegality and that major clubs commonly use observers' reports.
In a press interview, the LaLiga president said he believed the club had not paid referees, while maintaining that LaLiga remains a party to the proceedings and that the conduct would have warranted a sporting sanction had it not been time-barred.
At the request of his defence, Negreira, aged 80, was examined again by the Institute of Legal Medicine of Catalonia to assess the progression of his cognitive disorders.
Represented by its treasurer Alfons Castro, FC Barcelona told the judge that it complies with its obligations and has strengthened its internal controls since 2010. First-team delegate Carles Naval, heard as a witness, said he had received and kept the reports since 2014 without knowing whether they were used.
Expert report: Negreira unfit to follow the proceedings
Court proceedings
A report by the Institute of Legal Medicine of Catalonia concluded that Negreira no longer has the cognitive capacity to understand the proceedings (major neurocognitive disorder). As of the date of the sources consulted, the judge had not ruled; any removal from the proceedings would concern him alone and not the other persons under investigation.
Judge Alejandra Gil Lima summoned as witnesses, for 13 November 2026, Gerard López, former Barça B coach, who had stated publicly in February 2026 that he had received and used the reports, and the delegate Antonio Alonso.
The judge refuses to extend the investigation phase
Court proceedings
The judge rejected the extension (decision of August 2026, made public on 1 September) at the 1 September 2026 deadline, but the investigation phase is not closed until the two November witness statements have taken place. An appeal by Real Madrid concerning investigative measures (diligencias) remains pending before the Audiencia.
UEFA confirmed that it had received substantial documentation from Real Madrid, which will be examined by its inspectors in the investigation opened in 2023. FC Barcelona stressed that no new proceedings have been opened and that the UEFA proceedings depend on the outcome of the Spanish criminal case.
Items researched but not confirmed by a reliable source: they are not shown as facts in the timeline.
Exact date of the last payment (July 2018) — No reliable source consulted mentions July 2018; sources give 2018, linked to Negreira's departure from the CTA (May according to some, after June according to ESPN). Date kept at "year" precision.
Exact month in which Negreira took up his post at the CTA in 1994 — Only the year 1994 is documented (Fiscalía via elDiario.es, Catalan News).
Full breakdown of amounts by company over 2001-2018 (Dasnil 95, Nilsad, Soccercam) — Only the 2016-2018 period is broken down by company in the accessible sources; 2001-2018 totals range from €7.3m (Fiscalía) to €8.4m (Guardia Civil).
Outcome of the tax audit (regularisation, tax penalties for the club or Negreira) — No reliable source found on a final tax decision.
Judge's decision on Negreira's unfitness following the 2026 forensic medical report — Search of sources from June to October 2026: no decision found.
Date of any trial, opening of the trial phase (apertura de juicio oral) or general dismissal of the case — No reliable source; an estimate of a verdict at the end of 2027 comes from a site that was not used (africasoccer.com).
Current procedural status of Negreira's wife (money laundering) and of former executives Grau and Soler — They are listed as under investigation in 2025 (elDiario.es, 12 March 2025); no 2026 source specifies their status.
Complaint filed with FIFA ("Gravissimum") on 28 September 2026 — Single source (The Objective); author and admissibility not verified.
RFEF statement on joining the proceedings as a party (16 March 2023) — rfef.es page inaccessible (403); only the admission by the Audiencia (18 March 2024) is sourced.
Where the sources differ 8
Points on which the sources disagree; the timeline keeps the best-supported version.
Total amount: €7.3m (Fiscalía complaint), ~€7.5m (several media outlets), €8.4m (Guardia Civil report, December 2024); ESPN (2023) also mentions ~€6.65m excluding taxes.
SER revelation: ~€1.4m to Dasnil 95 (2016-2018) according to Infobae/Inside World Football; ESPN (2024) refers to €2.1m for the same period (probably including other companies).
End of payments: May 2018 (departure from the CTA) according to some sources, after June 2018 according to ESPN; July 2018 not confirmed.
Status of Joan Gaspart: witness according to elDiario.es and El Español, "investigado" according to Soccerway (not used).
Club's statement before the judge: scheduled for 27 January 2026 with vice-president Elena Fort, it took place on 10 April 2026 with treasurer Alfons Castro (EFE).
Date of Laporta's testimony: 12 December 2025 according to ESPN and elDiario.es; The Objective (October 2025) announced a summons in February.
2026 forensic medical report: dated March 2026 by Infobae, made public around May 2026 (Iusport).
UEFA: The Objective's headline refers to a "reactivation" of the case; UEFA (via ESPN) and FC Barcelona speak of an investigation that has been ongoing since 2023.
Warning: Factual chronology compiled from press sources and official statements. All persons named are entitled to the presumption of innocence; no conviction exists as of the date indicated.
Statistics: before / during / after
Periods: before = 2000-01 (a single season), during = 2001-02 → 2017-18 (payments), after = 2018-19 → 2025-26. The study preset compares Barça and Real Madrid with a control group (Atlético Madrid, Valencia CF, Sevilla FC). Every other club also has its figures on its page, and the comparison tool lets you choose your own control group.
Points obtained − expected points per match
Based on the average pre-match odds (margin removed). Select a group to see its three periods.
Points − expected pointsBefore each match, the bookmakers' odds give the probability of a win, a draw and a defeat. Expected points = 3 × P(win) + P(draw). A positive deviation means the club took more points than the market predicted. Because the team's strength is already built into the odds, a big club has no "automatic" positive deviation.
Per match; strength-adjusted measures (positive = favourable to the club)
Strength-adjusted measuresEach match is compared with Liga matches from the same season, at the same venue type (home/away) and between teams of comparable strength according to the odds. A positive value is favourable to the club.
"Before": a single season of 38 matches, too few to draw conclusions. Hover over an adjusted value to see its confidence interval.
FC Barcelona
2001-18 → 2018-26, per match
Adjusted measuresEach match is compared with Liga matches from the same season, at the same venue type (home/away) and between teams of comparable strength according to the odds. A positive value is favourable to the club.
Adjusted measuresEach match is compared with Liga matches from the same season, at the same venue type (home/away) and between teams of comparable strength according to the odds. A positive value is favourable to the club.
Adjusted measuresEach match is compared with Liga matches from the same season, at the same venue type (home/away) and between teams of comparable strength according to the odds. A positive value is favourable to the club.
(A during − A after) − (B during − B after). Positive: A's advantage fell more after 2018 than B's.
Difference-in-differencesWe measure the club's change between two periods, then subtract the change of a comparison group over the same periods. What remains is the change specific to the club.
Comparison
Measure
Diff-in-diff
95% CI
p
q
Reading
Barça vs control group
Points − expected
−0.111
[−0.256 ; 0.028]
0.12
0.27
inconclusive
Barça vs control group
Penalties (adjusted)
−0.016
[−0.091 ; 0.066]
0.69
0.73
inconclusive
Barça vs control group
Reds (adjusted)
−0.023
[−0.087 ; 0.039]
0.49
0.63
inconclusive
Barça vs control group
Yellows (adjusted)
+0.262
[−0.033 ; 0.549]
0.08
0.24
inconclusive
Barça vs control group
Yellows, Zenodo series (adjusted)
+0.322
[−0.068 ; 0.690]
0.10
0.27
inconclusive
Barça vs control group
Fouls (adjusted)
+1.50
[0.271 ; 2.759]
0.02
0.08
inconclusive
Barça vs Real Madrid
Points − expected
−0.006
[−0.215 ; 0.183]
0.95
0.95
inconclusive
Barça vs Real Madrid
Penalties (adjusted)
+0.024
[−0.086 ; 0.128]
0.65
0.73
inconclusive
Barça vs Real Madrid
Reds (adjusted)
+0.019
[−0.057 ; 0.091]
0.62
0.73
inconclusive
Barça vs Real Madrid
Yellows (adjusted)
+0.509
[0.244 ; 0.776]
< 0.001
< 0.001
notable deviation (q < 0.05)
Barça vs Real Madrid
Yellows, Zenodo series (adjusted)
+0.495
[0.126 ; 0.886]
0.006
0.04
notable deviation (q < 0.05)
Barça vs Real Madrid
Fouls (adjusted)
+3.11
[1.528 ; 4.634]
< 0.001
< 0.001
notable deviation (q < 0.05)
Real Madrid vs control group
Points − expected
−0.105
[−0.281 ; 0.071]
0.23
0.37
inconclusive
Real Madrid vs control group
Penalties (adjusted)
−0.040
[−0.127 ; 0.055]
0.37
0.55
inconclusive
Real Madrid vs control group
Reds (adjusted)
−0.042
[−0.111 ; 0.025]
0.22
0.37
inconclusive
Real Madrid vs control group
Yellows (adjusted)
−0.247
[−0.582 ; 0.077]
0.14
0.27
inconclusive
Real Madrid vs control group
Yellows, Zenodo series (adjusted)
−0.173
[−0.620 ; 0.239]
0.43
0.60
inconclusive
Real Madrid vs control group
Fouls (adjusted)
−1.62
[−3.074 ; −0.099]
0.04
0.14
inconclusive
Club-season block bootstrap; q = Benjamini-Hochberg correction over the 18 tests. Yellow cards and fouls also depend on playing style (possession, pressing), which the odds adjustment does not capture. VAR and the end of the payments coincide in 2018-19.
Referee × club: verdicts, appointments, important matches
Summary of referee × club verdicts
All clubs, pairs with at least 5 matches (1,325 pairs)
Verdict / q-valueWith hundreds of comparisons, some look extreme by chance. The Benjamini-Hochberg correction accounts for this: a deviation is only called notable if q < 0.05. Otherwise: inconclusive. Inconclusive does not mean "no effect": with 11 matches, only a deviation of about ±1.57 points per match could have been detected.
Measure
Tested
p < 0.05
Favourable
Unfavourable
Inconclusive
Points − expected
1,325
46
0
0
1,325
Penalty balance
1,325
38
0
0
1,325
Red-card balance
1,325
46
0
0
1,325
Yellow-card balance
1,325
62
0
0
1,325
Foul balance
1,235
63
0
0
1,325
Without correction, about 5% of tests fall below p < 0.05 by pure chance: that is the order of magnitude observed. After correction, no combination remains notable.
Appointment frequency
A club's matches assigned to a referee, observed vs expected
AppointmentsExpected number = the referee's share of matches each season (among the matches they can take: never a club from their own region) × the club's matches.
0notable out of 2,094 tested
Poisson test per referee × club combination, Benjamini-Hochberg correction. Details are on each pair page and in the "Referee × club" panel of referee pages.
Important matches
Are high-stakes matches assigned to certain referees more often? 2000-01 → 2025-26
Important matchesImportant match: opponent in the season's final top 4, or the Clásico (Barça – Real Madrid). The share of important matches refereed by this referee is compared with the share refereed by other referees for the same club. q = Benjamini-Hochberg correction across all combinations.
Combinations tested
1,297
p < 0.05 before correction
50
q < 0.05 after correction
0
FC Barcelona: 53 referees (sorted by number of matches)
Important match: opponent in the season's final top 4 (recomputed standings: points, head-to-head, goal difference, goals scored), plus the Clásico for Barça and Real Madrid. Fisher's exact test per club × referee combination (at least 5 matches), Benjamini-Hochberg correction across all combinations, all clubs. Each referee's details are on their page.
Limitations
LimitationsWhat these figures cannot tell us.
The odds reflect what the market knew before the match: a bias known to and priced in by the bookmakers would be underestimated.
Cards and fouls depend on playing style, which the odds adjustment does not capture.
The end of the payments and the arrival of VAR coincide (2018-19); matches behind closed doors in 2019-20 and 2020-21.
These tests deal with aggregate results. They say nothing about any specific decision in a match.
Before each match, the bookmakers' odds give the probability of a win, a draw and a defeat. Expected points = 3 × P(win) + P(draw). A positive deviation means the club took more points than the market predicted. Because the team's strength is already built into the odds, a big club has no "automatic" positive deviation.
q-value
With hundreds of comparisons, some look extreme by chance. The Benjamini-Hochberg correction accounts for this: a deviation is only called notable if q < 0.05. Otherwise: inconclusive. Inconclusive does not mean "no effect": with 11 matches, only a deviation of about ±1.57 points per match could have been detected.
Difference-in-differences
We measure the club's change between two periods, then subtract the change of a comparison group over the same periods. What remains is the change specific to the club.
Strength-adjusted measures
Each match is compared with Liga matches from the same season, at the same venue type (home/away) and between teams of comparable strength according to the odds. A positive value is favourable to the club.
