Does Argentina really benefit from refereeing at the World Cup?

  Lionel Messi's teammates, who are likely to win a second World Cup title in a row this Sunday, have been haunted by controversy since the start of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, with Argentina reportedly favoured by the refereeing staff. Several controversial refereeing decisions since the tournament began, have fueled this impression about the Albiceleste.

Just one game away from a resounding achievement, and after overturning a one-goal deficit against England in the semi-finals, they are set to make history on Sunday at the MetLife Stadium, in the final against Spain. But against a team that knocked out France, Argentina are not sure to have full fan support, due to doubts over refereeing favouritism following their performances.

In 2017, Gianni Infantino made no secret of his admiration for Argentina, when he told Argentine newspaper La Nación that "it would be unfair for Messi to retire without winning the World Cup," adding that Argentina should "leave its mark on history" like Diego Maradona did.

Words that resonated strongly in 2022, the moment of Argentina's coronation at the expense of France, continue to raise doubts among those who see some of the refereeing decisions in favor of Argentina as a reflection of a desire within FIFA. RMC Sport asks, while recalling the most prominent cases that sparked controversy:

Argentina-Algeria: Messi's controversial intervention

The controversy began from the first match that ended in Argentina's 3-0 win over Algeria, where Lionel Messi interfered on the leg of Issa Mandy, and deserved a red card. Despite scoring a hat-trick in that match, Messi was not even penalized for a foul.

Former Manchester City player Ndom Onoha said: "Messi should have been sent off in my opinion," while Alejandro Moreno said that "the expulsion is 100 per cent deserved." However, no action has been taken.

Argentina vs Austria: Controversial goal

After beating Algeria, Argentina faced Austria in a decisive match at the top of the group. Just before half-time, the goal came after a questionable tackle from Alexis Mac Allister.

"It knocked me down completely, it was a clear foul, the goal should not have been counted," Xavier Schlager said. But the referee did not consider it a clear foul, and the VAR did not intervene.

Argentina-Egypt: Cancelled goal sparks anger

In the quarter-finals, Argentina faced Egypt in a tiebreaker. After the Egyptians took a goal, French referee François Letixier awarded a penalty for Argentina that Messi wasted.

Later, Mustafa Ziko scored a second goal for Egypt, but the referee cancelled it after returning to video technology due to a slight offensive error at the start of the attack.

Egypt coach Hossam Hassan commented angrily: "Maybe they wanted the defending champions to stay in the competition? There are strange things that everyone has seen."

In the final moments, Argentina scored the winning goal amid Egyptian demands for a penalty in favor of Mohamed Salah, but the referee did not count anything.

Egypt coach Hossam Hassan commented angrily: "Maybe they wanted the defending champion to stay in the competition? There are strange things that everyone has seen."

Argentina vs Switzerland: Controversial red card

In the quarter-finals, the Swiss had just levelled the score through Ndoi, when Rennes striker Briel Embolo found himself on the ground near the touchline, in a clash with Leandro Paredes. Initially, the match referee, Joao Pinheiro, issued a yellow card to the Argentine player.

But the assistant video referee (VAR) intervened claiming that there was a case of "misidentification". A correction seems logical according to the photos, as it appeared that Embolo had already acted, but it angered the Swiss.

The text is clear: the offence itself cannot be revisited, unless it is directly related to the case of the mistaken identification. By granting a card to Embolo after reviewing the footage, the Portuguese ruling has deviated from the framework provided for by law.

But according to the amendment to Rule 6.5 of the International Football Association (IFAB), the body that sets the rules of the game, VAR can now intervene in the event of a "manifest error", including a "misidentification error when the referee does not warn or does not send off the correct player". Since Paredes and Embolo do not play on the same team, the referee did not actually "mistake" the player's identity, but rather his decision.

In the English version of the amendment, approved by FIFA and the IFAB just before the 2026 World Cup, the wording is different:VAR can  intervene in the event of a "misidentification error when the referee does not warn or does not expel the right player from the wrong team", noting that the phrase "from the wrong team" has been explicitly deleted to indicate that it is no longer approved.

This means that theVAR can  call the referee to give a card to a player from Team B if he initially punished a player from Team A after contact between them. According to this interpretation, the referee considered that Paredes had committed a foul during his clash with Embolo, but the video technology disagreed, considering that the obstruction came from the Swiss player, who was guilty of imitation.

A precedent in the case of Embolo

Since the legal text is not entirely accurate, it leaves the door open for interpretation, however, it is clear that video technology would not have intervened if it had not been for the announcement of a card against Paredes, as the use of video in the case of a mistake in the identification of a player is not allowed in the case of an ordinary violation without an additional penalty.

There is also a precedent in this edition of the World Cup. On June 13, during a group stage match between the United States and Paraguay, the referee showed a yellow card to American Tim Ream after he interfered with Miguel Almiron.

However, the Paraguayan player had pretended to fall, when  video technology intervened with the words "misidentification" appeared on the screen, and the player was eventually alerted from South America instead.

Argentina vs England: 'Phantom car-ramming' shot

In the semi-finals, Argentina led a thrilling comeback against England, but the decisive goal came amid doubts over a tackle by Messi on Jed Spence.

Despite the protest of the English fans, the replays showed that friction did not actually exist, weakening the hypothesis of a refereeing error.

What do the numbers say?

In terms of the number of fouls against cards, the conspiracy theory seems weak: with 86 fouls committed in this edition of the World Cup, the highest total among teams in the Golden Square, Argentina received 9 warnings, i.e. one yellow card for every 9.6 infractions.

This is lower than Spain (card for every 12.7 fouls) and France (card for every 11 fouls), only England are  penalizing at a faster pace (8.5), in other words, Lionel Scaloni's men are now among the fastest to be penalized in the tournament.

But another number strengthens the controversy: Argentina received three penalties, without any penalty counted against them, is this enough to accuse the referee of bias? The answer may become clearer after the upcoming final between Argentina and Spain, concludes