ARG vs EGY

[Sting of the North]

Disagree. Clear foul to win the ball that started the sequence. Good call, but unfortunate for Egypt, in my opinion. Just seemed more controversial because the time that elapsed, but it wemas one unbroken sequence of play.

Can't remember much else from this game that looked controversial either really. Would have liked some replays on what happened at the other end before Argentina's third goal though, as there were quite a few protests.

Too much time has passed for it to be a foul and the foul itself was quite soft. The third Argentina goal, similar thing happened to Salah and before that a player was pulled in the box, neither one was given as a foul, the goal stood.

Against Austria, similar thing happened, where an Austrian player was fouled just before Argentina scored from a counter attack, the goal stood.

As for other things,no yellows for Argentina despite them making a lot of fouls, lots of which were professional/tactical/whatever you call them fouls. Every 50-50 went Argentina's way. Look at previous games again too. Same thing. I've already mentioned the goal they've scored vs Austria, there are other examples too.

I don't think you understand the rule then. There is no time limit. They look at the attacking phase of play that starts with them winning the ball. It's been the rule since VAR was introduced. On this occasion it just happened to take longer than usual to finish the sequence. I also don't think the foul was that soft, as it was clear and the direct reason for them winning the ball.

I haven't seen many replays of the two situations before Argentina's third goal, but on the replays I saw it looked as if they would have been extremely soft if given. Maybe I would change my mind with better replays.

As for the rest of the game, I can honestly say that I wasn't invested enough to follow it very closely, so you nay be correct that the referee was not fair, I really couldn't say.

[SerbianLad]

I don't think you understand the rule then. There is no time limit. They look at the attacking phase of play that starts with them winning the ball. It's been the rule since VAR was introduced. On this occasion it just happened to take longer than usual to finish the sequence. I also don't think the foul was that soft, as it was clear and the direct reason for them winning the ball.

I haven't seen many replays of the two situations before Argentina's third goal, but on the replays I saw it looked as if they would have been extremely soft if given. Maybe I would change my mind with better replays.

As for the rest of the game, I can honestly say that I wasn't invested enough to follow it very closely, so you nay be correct that the referee was not fair, I really couldn't say.

Well how wasn't Argentina's goal against Austria chalked off then, if that's the rule. Pretty much the exact same situation? Or the 3rd goal today, similar situation. The rules are good if they're consistent, otherwise, what's the point?

I came into the game from a neutral standpoint (I actually wanted Egypt to lose in all of their previous games and I started the WC cheering for Argentina, though that changed as the tournament went on and it became obvious that the referees are biased towards them), but it became obvious to me that the referee is favouring Argentina again so towards the end of the match, I wanted Egypt to win.

[Sting of the North]

I don't think you understand the rule then. There is no time limit. They look at the attacking phase of play that starts with them winning the ball. It's been the rule since VAR was introduced. On this occasion it just happened to take longer than usual to finish the sequence. I also don't think the foul was that soft, as it was clear and the direct reason for them winning the ball.

I haven't seen many replays of the two situations before Argentina's third goal, but on the replays I saw it looked as if they would have been extremely soft if given. Maybe I would change my mind with better replays.

As for the rest of the game, I can honestly say that I wasn't invested enough to follow it very closely, so you nay be correct that the referee was not fair, I really couldn't say.

Well how wasn't Argentina's goal against Austria chalked off then, if that's the rule. Pretty much the exact same situation? Or the 3rd goal today, similar situation. The rules are good if they're consistent, otherwise, what's the point?

I came into the game from a neutral standpoint (I actually wanted Egypt to lose in all of their previous games and I started the WC cheering for Argentina, though that changed as the tournament went on and it became obvious that the referees are biased towards them), but it became obvious to me that the referee is favouring Argentina again so towards the end of the match, I wanted Egypt to win.

I can't say why on those occasions, but presumably because they were deemed not to be fouls. It is still a subjective assessment.

[SerbianLad]

I can't say why on those occasions, but presumably because they were deemed not to be fouls. It is still a subjective assessment.

I find it funny how the "subjective assessment" always seems to favour Argentina at this WC.

Another example of refs favouring Argentina is the red that wasn't given to Messi against Algeria. Stonewall red.

[Thailand Mick]

Just to add more wood to the fire Argentina average 22 fouls for each booking which is the most compared to England who average 7 fouls for each booking.

[Bassey the warrior]

Didn't see the game but I checked BBC to see Egypt were 2-0 up with twenty mins to go. Gutted for them to have lost.

Regarding the disallowed Egypt goal it did look a foul to me, so probably correct. Such a shame because it was a fantastic goal. Haven't seen the replay for Argentina third goal.

Instinctively I agree big teams are being favoured though. Messi committed a foul worse than Balogun, and clearly intentional, versus Algeria but it wasn't even given as a foul. Lots of other dubious Argentina tackles in that game. We also benefited from big team bias in the Ghana game as we should've conceded a penalty.

[bog]

It's a good job that VAR was brought in to stop it looking as though the big teams were favoured by referees.   

[FFCBadger]

Since Trump got the US red card suspended FIFA have lost all credibility.
Yes, the addition of VAR has made these things plainly clear

[Bassey the warrior]

This video is pretty damning about the pro-Argentina refereeing:

https://www.threads.com/@world_at_a_brink/post/Dag23qvD9Si?xmt=AQG0bJCW8HUJbhsPGXKlmumgBfVfUYhwG7igCeslOJkHx6jwgPyzCR3NM9WJ8bN96jiMSWS0&slof=1

This makes my anti-Argentina stance even firmer:

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2026/6/10/the-myth-of-white-argentina-still-shapes-the-nation

I'm rooting for Switzerland. 

[Jim©]

This video is pretty damning about the pro-Argentina refereeing:

https://www.threads.com/@world_at_a_brink/post/Dag23qvD9Si?xmt=AQG0bJCW8HUJbhsPGXKlmumgBfVfUYhwG7igCeslOJkHx6jwgPyzCR3NM9WJ8bN96jiMSWS0&slof=1

That's about the most damning thing that you'll watch.
There's definitely something shifty going on, it only needed a fool like Trump to brag about his intervention to show FIFA up for what they are.

 

[The Old Count]

France v Morocco.

All of the officials are from...wait for it: Argentina.

[SerbianLad]

France v Morocco.

All of the officials are from...wait for it: Argentina.

Amd in Argentina's match, all referees were from France. Will they return the favour :)