Málaga CF has filed a formal complaint over the non-retake of a missed penalty during their draw against Levante UD at La Rosaleda stadium. Forward Chupete saw his spot-kick saved by the visiting goalkeeper, in an action where centre-back Mandi encroached into the area before the shot was taken. As reported by Marca - Primera on Tuesday, the Málaga CF-based club and Real Madrid have made identical appeals to the Technical Committee of Referees (CTA) following twin incidents in the LaLiga EA Sports matchday.
The team's next fixture is at home against Athletic Club on November 29, 2026, as listed on our fixtures page. The incident occurred when Mandi, with one leg in the air, moved forward into the penalty area as Chupete took the kick. The goalkeeper guessed the trajectory and made the save, but the protest focused on the defender's positioning. The match referee deemed no infringement had occurred, a decision the club considers contradictory to the season-start manual published by the CTA.
What does the rulebook say about encroachment?
The CTA's season-start manual is clear in its definition of penalty area encroachment by a defender. It states a player encroaches when "one or both feet are inside the area or on the penalty area line". The document further specifies that body projections, like a stretched arm or leg, are not considered when evaluating early entry. This means, technically, Mandi's leg being in the air would not constitute encroachment if his feet had not crossed the line.
This interpretation was referenced by Marc Bartra, the Betis defender, after a similar situation in his team's match against Real Madrid. Bartra stated: "Hace como varias jornadas atrás, creo que fue Gayà, que hizo el saltito y le pregunté a un árbitro que tengo amigo de Segunda B, que ya no está arbitrando, y me dijo eso, que si tú estás, pero que no estás pisando…". His comment highlights the existing confusion even among players about the specific application of this rule.
Why is it identical to the Real Madrid case?
The situation at La Rosaleda is a carbon copy of the one in the Betis vs Real Madrid match, where a penalty retake was also requested for alleged encroachment. In both cases, a defender advanced with his body, the goalkeeper saved the shot, and the main referee did not signal the infringement. The coincidence has led both clubs, Málaga CF and Real Madrid, to raise their complaints in parallel, seeking clarification and consistency in officiating criteria for the rest of the competition.
The fact that two twin incidents occurred on the same matchday highlights the need for clearer communication between the refereeing body and the teams. The current makeup of Málaga CF's squad, which includes Chupete as the designated taker, could be affected by this uncertainty in future penalty situations. Consistency in decisions is a key element for tactical planning.
What are the consequences for Málaga CF?
Beyond the specific match result, which ended in a draw, Málaga CF's complaint aims to set a precedent for the rest of the season. The club hopes the CTA will unify its criterion and make clear how the rule will be applied in borderline situations. This search for clarity is especially relevant in a very tight league, where every point can be decisive, as seen in the current standings.
The non-retake of the penalty cost the Málaga CF team two potential points at home. While awaiting the Committee's response, the team must focus on preparing for their next challenge at La Rosaleda. Málaga CF hosts Athletic Club on Sunday, November 29, 2026, in a match already on the official schedule.
