Ibai Llanos stays silent during anti-Sánchez chant at Kings League

Kings League, the anti-Sánchez chant, and Ibai’s silence

An anti-Pedro Sánchez chant at a celebrity football match. A collective reaction: several attendees laugh, including Gerard Piqué. And an exception lasting just three seconds of video: Ibai Llanos, the event host, with a serious face. That contrast is all there is, yet it suffices to reopen a long-dormant debate: whether Spain’s biggest content creator is an audience phenomenon or a piece placed from above.

The scene, shared by Sergio "Kun" Agüero during the Kings League, has the structure of a perfect political meme. Almost no one disputes the chant. They dispute the facial expression.

What peine in the Kings League

In the clip, the former Argentine footballer launches the slogan that the opposition has used against the Prime Minister, a catchphrase referring to an ETA member that has become a staple at some public events. The crowd responds, several participants laugh, but the presenter does not. The most widespread interpretation is that Ibai avoided joining a gesture that wasn’t worth his while.

The episode is significant because it mixes two things that rarely coexist: mass entertainment and political signaling. A celebrity match isn’t a rally. But the chant isn’t neutral either, and whoever starts it knows exactly who they are targeting.

The theory that someone planted him there

Much of the circulating criticism argues that the streamer’s rise to prominence wasn’t organic. Critics point to his discourse on taxes—he advocated paying them in Spain just as another major Spanish-speaking creator moved to Andorra—his presence at events funded through the young people’s cultural voucher, and his discomfort whenever politics enters the frame. The conclusion drawn is that someone was pushing from above and that the silence in the video is proof of the crime.

The problem is that this conclusion lacks evidence. It relies on coincidences and sympathies, not documents. A young creator having a pogre discourse and avoiding online drama doesn’t prove a state operation; it describes half a generation living off their audience.

The counterargument: power doesn’t pay well here

The strongest objection to the "planted product" theory is fiscal. Those who settle in Andorra don’t pay tax in Spain; those who invoice here do. If the goal were to protect him, the first measure would be not to squeeze him. Moreover, the character’s biography works against the theory: he has never openly supported any party and, when forced to take a stand, chose the position generating the least noise.

Against this, the argument that his growth coincides with the gap left by another creator in the teenage audience holds up. But correlation isn’t causation, and the common explanation—everyone was stuck at home with nothing to do—doesn’t stand alone: we were all stuck at home, and not everyone built an empire.

The €400 cultural voucher

A specific detail fuels the controversy. The young people’s cultural voucher, worth €400 for those turning 18, reportedly included the Velada del Año (an annual boxing/entertainment event), according to a tweet reproduced ad nauseam. Some read this as a covert subsidy to a private individual; others respond that it is a general program benefiting hundreds of cultural operators. Both can be true simultaneously, which is where the argument gets stuck.

It is worth remembering the uncomfortable detail: the taxpayer pays for the program, whether they are 18 or 60. That is the only fact in the file that no one disputes.

The chant as a political brand

That the slogan jumps from a rally to a celebrity match says less about the streamer than about the health of public debate. The catchphrase worked because it is short, rhymes, and angers the opponent—three conditions for any enduring slogan. In that sense, the video doesn’t portray Ibai; it portrays a fanbase that has turned politics into stadium chanting.

And there lies the unsettling detail. The uncomfortable figure isn’t the one who stays silent, but the one who doesn’t. If the chant had come from his mouth, the controversy would have lasted an afternoon. Since it didn’t, it has lasted weeks.

Why silence generates so much noise

The "people-pleaser" theory—young, pogre, and allergic to internet mobs, not out of conviction but calculation—explains more than the public employee theory. It fits his track record: taking just enough risks to avoid being canceled, and enough to not seem lukewarm. It is a commercial strategy, not a political stance.

By the way, none of the official attempts to connect with young audiences have succeeded. This data point, often forgotten, significantly weakens the idea of an efficient machine dedicated to manufacturing stars.

With these elements, the interesting question isn’t whether the creator is left-wing or right-wing—no one supports the latter, and the former isn’t news—but what is demanded of someone living off an audience counted in millions. Should he take a stand or stay silent? And who decides when a serious face is cowardice and when it is simply common sense?