Gianluca Prestianni has clarified what he says he told Vinícius Jr. during their heated Champions League clash, as UEFA continues its investigation into alleged discriminatory language.
The incident unfolded during a tense European encounter that was briefly halted under UEFA’s anti-discrimination protocol after Vinícius reported abuse.
With the matter now under formal review, Prestianni’s version of events has become central to the disciplinary process.
Gianluca Prestianni reveals what he told Vinícius Jr
According to ESPN, “Sources told ESPN’s Bruno Andrade that the Argentinian, 20, has given evidence stating that he called Vinicius the anti-gay slur “m——” in Spanish, rather than “mono,” which is Spanish for monkey.”
The distinction is significant. Vinícius initially alleged racist abuse, while Prestianni’s reported explanation suggests a different form of offensive language. Both would fall under UEFA’s disciplinary scope if proven.
The confrontation followed a flashpoint moment in the match, after Vinícius had been involved in celebrations and exchanges with opposition players. UEFA subsequently activated its anti-racism protocol and appointed an ethics and disciplinary inspector to review the evidence.
UEFA regulations on discriminatory language
UEFA’s disciplinary code outlines clear consequences for discriminatory behaviour. The regulations state:
“Any entity or person subject to these regulations who insults the human dignity of a person or group of persons on whatever grounds, including skin colour, race, religion, ethnic origin, gender or sexual orientation, incurs a suspension lasting at least ten matches or a specified period of time, or any other appropriate sanction.”
This framework applies regardless of whether the language is deemed racist or homophobic. If investigators determine that discriminatory remarks were made, sanctions could include a lengthy suspension.
The case remains under review, and UEFA has not yet announced a final decision. Until that process concludes, the focus remains on ensuring that all evidence is assessed under the governing body’s established disciplinary standards.
Read more: