Perhaps they wanted Messi to stay in the running.
In the long history of sport's collision with power, few tensions run deeper than the suspicion that outcomes are shaped before the whistle blows. At the 2026 World Cup in the United States, Egypt's coaching staff and players emerged from a 3-2 defeat to Argentina alleging that referee decisions and VAR interventions systematically favored the reigning champions — and, by extension, the global spectacle that Lionel Messi's continued presence guarantees. Whether the grievances reflect genuine injustice or the anguish of a painful collapse, they raise a question the sport has never fully answered: can a governing body with commercial interests in certain outcomes be trusted to ensure impartial judgment?
- Egypt built a commanding 2-0 lead only to see it dismantled in 25 minutes through a sequence of VAR reversals and uncalled fouls that left their bench in disbelief.
- Coach Hossam Hassan and forward Mostafa Ziko did not soften their language — calling the match 'rigged' and accusing FIFA of applying pressure to keep Messi and Argentina alive in the tournament.
- The specific grievances are pointed: a penalty overturned, a Salah foul never reviewed, and a goal disallowed for an infraction that occurred 20 seconds earlier on the opposite end of the pitch.
- This match did not emerge in a vacuum — an earlier red card controversy involving England's Folarin Balogun had already strained confidence in officiating consistency across the tournament.
- FIFA now faces a compounding credibility problem as the tournament advances, with the unresolved question of whether commercial incentives around marquee players are quietly bending the rules of the game.
The 2026 World Cup had been drawing praise for its venues and atmosphere when Egypt and Argentina met on Tuesday and plunged the tournament into its deepest controversy yet. Egypt's coach Hossam Hassan walked away from a 3-2 defeat not lamenting his team's defensive collapse, but accusing the referee and VAR system of denying his side basic fairness.
Hassan catalogued the decisions that enraged him: a penalty overturned on review, a foul on Mohamed Salah that VAR never examined, and — most strikingly — Egypt's second goal disallowed for an infraction that had occurred roughly 20 seconds earlier on the far side of the pitch. His conclusion was blunt. 'We have been treated unfairly, and it has been an injustice,' he told reporters, adding that Argentina appeared to have received 'support at every level' and that external pressure had shaped the referee's decisions.
The subtext was unmistakable: FIFA has a financial and commercial interest in keeping Lionel Messi in the competition, and Hassan believed that interest had found its way onto the pitch. Forward Mostafa Ziko was even more direct, calling it 'a rigged game' and describing how everything seemed to turn against Egypt the moment they went 2-0 up.
The accusations landed against an already unsettled officiating backdrop. Earlier in the tournament, England's Folarin Balogun had received a red card through a disputed VAR application, with FIFA later suspending his ban — a decision that had already drawn sharp criticism from European quarters. But Egypt's claims carried a different charge: not mere error, but institutional bias in favor of a defending champion whose global draw is worth billions.
Whether deliberate pressure on referees is provable remains an open question. Some of the VAR calls were genuinely borderline; others, particularly the disallowed goal, strained credibility. What is not in question is that a team which outplayed its opponent by most technical measures left the field as losers — and that the sport's governing body now carries into the next rounds a deepening suspicion about whose interests the tournament is truly designed to serve.
The 2026 World Cup in the United States had been running smoothly. Visiting fans praised the hospitality. Stadiums across the country drew acclaim for their facilities and atmosphere. Then Egypt and Argentina took the field on Tuesday afternoon, and the tournament's officiating came under siege.
Egypt's coach Hossam Hassan left the match furious. His team had built a 2-0 lead, only to watch it evaporate in a span of 25 minutes as Argentina scored three straight goals to win 3-2. But Hassan's anger wasn't directed at his players' collapse. It was aimed at the referee and the VAR system. He told reporters afterward that his team had been denied basic fairness.
Hassan outlined the specific grievances. A penalty that should have stood was overturned. A second potential penalty—this one involving star forward Mohamed Salah—was never even reviewed by VAR. Then came Egypt's second goal, which was disallowed after VAR determined a foul had occurred roughly 20 seconds earlier on the opposite side of the pitch. That decision seemed particularly suspect to Hassan. "A second goal was remarkably, for whatever reason, disallowed," he said. He didn't mince words about what he believed had happened. "We have been treated unfairly, and it has been an injustice."
Hassan went further, suggesting the fix was in from above. He noted that Egypt had outplayed the reigning champions in every technical aspect of the game. Yet the result told a different story. "Perhaps they wanted to keep the world champion in the competition," he said. "Perhaps they wanted Messi to stay in the running." He added that Argentina had received "support at every level" and that there appeared to be "pressure on the Argentinian side on the referee that has brought about this outcome." The implication was clear: FIFA had an interest in keeping Lionel Messi and his team alive in the tournament because their presence meant higher viewership and global interest.
Forward Mostafa Ziko echoed the complaint with even starker language. "It was a rigged game," he said. Ziko couldn't understand why Egypt's second goal had been disallowed. He described a match that turned against Egypt systematically after they reached 2-0. "We were winning 2-0. After the 2-0 result, everything went against us and worked against us," he said. The frustration was palpable: a team that had dominated the field found itself on the losing end of a series of decisions that seemed to flow in one direction.
This wasn't the tournament's first officiating controversy. Earlier, English forward Folarin Balogun had received a red card in a match against Bosnia and Herzegovina based on a misapplication of VAR rules. FIFA later postponed his suspension, allowing him to play in the next round. That decision had sparked outrage among European fans and officials. But the Egyptian complaints carried a different weight—they suggested not just human error, but deliberate bias in favor of a marquee player and defending champion.
There's no question that FIFA benefits when Messi remains in the tournament. His presence drives interest and viewership in ways few other players can match. Whether that translated into actual pressure on the referee is unknowable from the outside. Some of the VAR decisions did seem questionable, particularly the disallowed goal. Other calls were the kind of borderline judgments that could reasonably go either way depending on how a referee interprets the rules.
But Hassan and Ziko weren't interested in nuance. They had watched their team play better soccer and lose anyway, and they believed the system had been rigged against them. As the tournament moved forward, the question lingered: would FIFA's desire to keep star players in the competition influence how matches were officiated? And if so, what did that mean for the integrity of the sport?
Citas Notables
We have been treated unfairly, and it has been an injustice.— Coach Hossam Hassan
It was a rigged game. We were winning 2-0, and he kept coming at us.— Forward Mostafa Ziko
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
When Egypt's coach says the game was rigged, is he making a serious accusation or venting frustration?
He's doing both. Hassan is clearly angry, but he's also laying out specific incidents—the disallowed goal, the unchecked penalty. He's not just saying the result was unfair; he's saying the system itself was compromised.
But couldn't those VAR decisions just be mistakes?
They could be. The disallowed goal does seem questionable, but VAR reviews are inherently subjective. What Hassan is claiming is different—he's saying the decisions weren't random errors but part of a pattern designed to keep Argentina in the tournament.
Why would FIFA want Argentina to stay in specifically?
Messi. He's arguably the biggest name in international soccer right now. His presence drives viewership, sponsorship interest, global engagement. A tournament without him is less valuable to FIFA.
So is Hassan right that the game was rigged?
That's the hard part. You can't prove intent from decisions alone. What you can say is that the calls went one direction, and that direction benefited the team with the biggest star. Whether that's conspiracy or coincidence is something each person has to decide.
What does this mean for the rest of the tournament?
It raises a question that won't go away: are star players getting different treatment? If fans start believing that, the credibility of the whole competition suffers, regardless of whether it's actually true.