legitimacy

The clamour surrounding the World Cup’s controversy involving US President Donald Trump and FIFA chief Gianni Infantino had barely died down when another arose in the aftermath of Argentina’s controversial 3-2 win over Egypt in the round-of-16 match in Atlanta.

As the defending champions staged a stunning comeback against the Pharaohs in the knockout match on Tuesday, questions were raised about an unusually late VAR call that saw Egypt’s second goal rescinded, followed by a chain of events that led to Argentina’s victory.

A day earlier, Trump had revealed that he had asked FIFA to review, and overturn, USA striker Folarin Balogun’s one-game suspension for a red card, and the governing body controversially obliged. The matter was dusted off by Belgium as they dumped the hosts out of the tournament with a 4-1 win in the match Balogun was initially suspended from but ended up playing – to no avail.

Trump watch on the World Cup

While the anger surrounding FIFA’s red-card decision was directed at both the football governing body and Trump, Egypt’s outburst was solely aimed at the organisation, which, according to Egypt’s manager, had “wanted to keep the world champions in the competition”.

Head coach Hossam Hassan speculated that match officials had been put under pressure to ensure that one of the biggest names, Argentina’s Lionel Messi, stayed in the tournament.

“Perhaps they wanted Messi to stay in the running,” Hassan told beIN Sports after the match.

“In football, there are sometimes external factors that go beyond the technical aspects. The world champions received support at every level.”

While the tournament has been no stranger to the political spotlight of questionable integrity, experts say the lines between sport and politics have been blurred even further.

“After the Balogun affair, who knows which decisions are legitimate and can be trusted, and which can’t?” Simon Chadwick, professor of Afro-Eurasian sport at the Emlyon Business School in Shanghai, told Al Jazeera.

“If the Trump administration is maintaining a watching brief over the tournament, it’s worth remembering: Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, is a staunch Trump supporter.”

Trump and his Argentinian counterpart share a close relationship. Milei is a regular feature at pro-Trump political gatherings in the United States, and Trump has described Argentina’s far-right populist leader as his “favourite president”.

Chadwick also opined that Hassan’s vociferous support for Palestine at the World Cup could have prompted some officials to “have built-in biases when making decisions”.

Hassan dedicated part of his pre-match news conference on Monday to making an impassioned plea for the people of Palestine, especially those in the besieged Gaza Strip.

Advantage, Argentina

Circling back to the VAR call that sliced Egypt’s lead in half and was followed by decisions that conveniently favoured Argentina, Chadwick said the period of play was “unusual”.

He wondered why the referee had not called a foul in real-time that VAR picked up several moments later and only once Egypt scored their second goal.

“There was something distinctly unusual about the goal and VAR decision, something that was amplified when Argentina scored one of its goals,” Chadwick said, questioning refereeing standards in the match.

“In the build-up, an infringement was perpetrated by an Argentina player, which could have been interpreted as a similar offence to that supposedly committed earlier by the Egyptian player. At the very least, refereeing standards during the game were somewhat inconsistent, although critics are clearly making much more serious claims.”

But while many social media commentators and football experts were outraged at the decisions – Portuguese football icon Jose Mourinho reportedly termed the match “daylight robbery” – some football experts said it was a closer call.

“Robbed might be a strong word,” football analyst Ali El Garni said.

“I’d say decisions made by both the referee and VAR could have gone either way, and Argentina benefitted from all the 50/50 incidents.

“The incident leading to the Egyptian disallowed goal was an indisputable foul. The question is how far VAR should go back to check the legitimacy of a goal,” said El Garni, who has extensively reported on European and North African football.

However, he did wonder if VAR would have been involved had the scoreline been 2-0 in Argentina’s favour instead.

“Would the goal have been disallowed had it been scored by Argentina? It’s unlikely,” he said.

“What’s making it worse for Egypt is the fact that a similar incident involving what appeared to be a foul on [Mohamed] Salah took place before Argentina’s third goal, and VAR didn’t intervene,” he said.

Meanwhile, Chadwick questioned why VAR officials had raised the issue if the on-field officials did not call a foul when Egypt‘s Marwan Attia lightly tugged the shirt and stepped on the foot of Lisandro Martinez.

A logical solution to the VAR issue, Chadwick proposed, would be “for fans and viewers to listen to an assessment of the alleged offence, hear the various arguments, and have a clear insight into the basis for a decision”.

Chadwick admitted that although Egyptian players should not have become overwhelmed with emotion, “a sense of injustice was induced by the VAR decision”.

“This technology was supposed to minimise doubt and bring consistency. Instead, its use during this match had significant cognitive and behavioural effects,” he said.

“Indeed, rather than brandishing cards and inflaming the situation even further, the referee should have used his discretion and judgement to defuse the situation.”

While Chadwick dismissed rumours of match-rigging in favour of Messi and Argentina, he acknowledged the pull of the iconic footballer’s star power.

“There is no doubt that Messi is a box office attraction the tournament really can’t afford to be without.”