Refereeing expert says Egypt were denied legitimate goal in Argentina defeat

A former English referee has said Egypt were unfortunate to have a goal ruled out during their controversial FIFA World Cup last-16 defeat by Argentina, while supporting the decision not to award Mohamed Salah a late penalty.

In an analysis published by The Athletic, refereeing expert Graham Scott said VAR made the wrong call by recommending the cancellation of Mostafa Ziko’s goal, arguing that the contact earlier in the move did not justify overturning the on-field decision.

Scott said the challenge involving Marwan Attia and Argentina defender Lisandro Martinez amounted to normal football contact rather than a foul.

VAR intervention ‘not justified’

According to Scott, the incident occurred around 100 yards from goal, giving Argentina sufficient time to recover defensively before Egypt eventually found the net.

He said the contact between the two players was minimal, describing it as either slight foot-to-foot contact or a brief shirt pull, and insisted it fell well below the threshold required for VAR intervention.

“The greater the time and space distance between the incident and the goal, the more obvious the violation must be to justify VAR intervention, which did not happen in this instance.”

Scott explained that while VAR reviews every phase of play leading up to a goal, it should only recommend overturning a goal if there is a clear and obvious infringement. In his view, that standard was not met, adding that Egypt’s frustration over the disallowed goal was understandable.

No penalty for Salah, says Scott

However, Scott reached a different conclusion over Egypt’s appeal for a penalty shortly before Argentina scored the winning goal.

The former referee said the contact on Mohamed Salah inside the penalty area was too slight to warrant a spot-kick, backing French referee Francois Letexier’s decision to allow play to continue.

He concluded that consistency was the key issue in the match, arguing that Egypt’s goal should have been allowed to stand while Enzo Fernandez’s decisive winner should also have counted because, in his opinion, there was no foul on Salah.

“Just as Egypt’s goal should not have been disallowed, Enzo Fernandez’s goal should also not have been disallowed, because the penalty claimed by the Egyptian team did not exist.”

Scott’s assessment adds to the ongoing debate surrounding the officiating in Egypt’s 3-2 defeat, a match that has continued to generate scrutiny following the Egyptian Football Association’s official protest to FIFA.