It seems like it's wrong to compliment someone who does their job
Juárez publicly criticized the backlash, arguing that praising someone for good work should not be controversial in sports. Cruz Azul filed a complaint about Quintero's assignment to the Final, though Pumas claims they were not disadvantaged by the selection.
- Daniel Quintero officiated Pumas' semifinal win over Pachuca and was assigned to the Liga MX final second leg
- Juárez told Quintero after the semifinal: 'I hope you whistle the final. Really good job'
- Cruz Azul filed a formal complaint about Quintero's assignment to the final
- Pumas' previous protest during the tournament was about América fielding an ineligible player, not about referee bias
Efraín Juárez breaks silence on viral video complimenting referee Daniel Quintero, defending his comments as normal sportsmanship while addressing Cruz Azul's formal complaint about the official's Final assignment.
Efraín Juárez sat down to address the storm he had created without meaning to. A video of him complimenting referee Daniel Quintero after Pumas' semifinal victory over Pachuca had gone viral on Tuesday, and the timing made it impossible to ignore: the very same official had just been assigned to the second leg of the Liga MX final against Cruz Azul. What looked like a coach securing favorable treatment for the biggest match of the season was now the subject of league-wide scrutiny.
The moment itself had been unremarkable. After the semifinal return match at Ciudad Universitaria, where no controversial calls had marred the game, Juárez had approached Quintero and offered genuine praise. "You did excellent work," he told the referee. "I hope you whistle the final. Really good job, I swear." It was the kind of thing coaches say all the time—acknowledgment of competence, a casual expression of preference. But once the Referees Commission announced Quintero's assignment to the final, the comment transformed into something else entirely: evidence of impropriety, a suggestion that Juárez had been lobbying for a favorable official.
At the media day before the first leg of the final, Juárez decided to confront the controversy head-on. He was frustrated, and it showed. "It seems like it's wrong to compliment someone who does their job," he said, his tone sharp with disbelief. "Next time I guess I should insult them, yell at them, and then everyone would be happy and there wouldn't be a problem. Today it's incredible—complimenting someone who does good work becomes a scandal." He pressed the point further, drawing parallels to everyday sportsmanship. "It's sad, it's strange. I don't see any controversy. You congratulate the opposing coach, you congratulate a player after a match. I don't understand. Honestly, I don't understand these things sometimes."
Cruz Azul had filed a formal complaint about Quintero's assignment, and Juárez was asked to respond to that grievance. He acknowledged their right to protest, even sympathized with their position. If Pumas had been in their shoes, he suggested, he might have done the same thing. But he pushed back on the implication that his team benefited from the referee selection. "We weren't disadvantaged by Daniel Quintero," he told RÉCORD. "That's not why we're here."
Juárez then clarified what Pumas had actually protested during the tournament. It wasn't about referees—it was about procedure. When América fielded an ineligible player in the first leg of the quarterfinals, Pumas objected to how the situation was handled, not to the official who missed it. "We never said change the referee," Juárez explained. "We said there's a controversy, there's a disciplinary issue. We protested the injustice, the process that was done wrong." The distinction mattered to him: complaining about a bad call or a bad official was one thing; complaining about the integrity of the competition itself was another.
What had begun as a casual compliment had become a referendum on how Mexican football conducts itself. Juárez seemed genuinely bewildered by the uproar, unable to reconcile the simple act of praising competence with the scandal it had provoked. As the final approached, the question lingered unresolved: had he crossed a line, or had the sport simply become too suspicious of its own people?
Notable Quotes
Complimenting someone who does good work becomes a scandal. I don't understand these things sometimes.— Efraín Juárez, Pumas manager
We never said change the referee. We said there's a controversy, there's a disciplinary issue.— Efraín Juárez, on Pumas' actual complaint during the tournament
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why did that video cause such a stir? Coaches praise referees all the time.
Because it looked like he was asking for that specific referee in the final. The timing made it look intentional—like he was securing an advantage.
But he says he was just being polite after a well-officiated game.
That's true. And that's what makes it complicated. He probably was being genuine. But in a sport where people are always looking for hidden angles, a coach praising a referee who then gets assigned to the biggest match looks like a pattern, not a coincidence.
So Cruz Azul's complaint makes sense from their perspective.
Completely. They saw what everyone else saw and thought, if that's how it works, we need to object. Whether Juárez actually influenced anything is almost beside the point—the appearance was enough.
What does Juárez think about all this?
He's frustrated. He genuinely doesn't understand why praising someone for doing their job well has become controversial. He sees it as normal sportsmanship, and maybe he's right. But he's also a coach in a final, and that context changes everything.