FIFA says Breel Embolo World Cup dismissal followed rules as IFAB circular ‘not about error’

FIFA has insisted that Breel Embolo’s red card against Argentina at the 2026 World Cup was correctly issued and in full accordance with the refereeing guidelines used during the tournament, despite a later IFAB circular that sparked claims the decision had been a mistake.

The world governing body moved to clarify the situation after “circular No 34” from the International Football Association Board (IFAB) was widely portrayed in some media as an implicit admission that Embolo, the Switzerland forward, had been wrongly sent off in the quarter-final.

According to Spanish refereeing specialist outlet “Archivo VAR”, which detailed the correspondence between the bodies, the circular was not a correction of a World Cup error but a post‐tournament adjustment and clarification of the law to close a loophole exposed by the incident.

At the World Cup itself, the VAR protocol allowed intervention in cases of “mistaken identity”. That framework enabled the referee to revisit a yellow card initially shown to Argentina’s Leandro Paredes for a foul that did not actually occur, and then transfer the booking to Embolo once replays showed the Swiss striker had simulated.

Under the regulations in force during the tournament, that review was permitted because the identity of the player who should have been booked was in question, even though the original offence called by the referee was effectively non-existent.

After the World Cup, IFAB amended the wording so that in future such reviews would be limited strictly to correcting the identity of the player cautioned or sent off, without reopening the underlying foul decision itself. In other words, VAR could still fix who was carded, but not whether the offence should have been given in the first place.

Archivo VAR stresses that a law change or clarification introduced after a competition does not retroactively render past applications of the previous protocol incorrect. The decision in the Argentina v Switzerland match therefore remains valid in the context of the rules that applied at the time.

Crucially for the outcome of the incident, Embolo did merit a yellow card for simulation, the outlet explains. As he had already been booked earlier in the match, the second caution automatically led to his dismissal – an outcome that, under a correct application of the laws, he would have faced regardless.

The analysis further argues that the initial error actually went against Argentina. The referee first awarded a non-existent foul against Paredes and showed him a yellow card before using the available protocol to reverse that decision and caution the player who had attempted to deceive the officials.

FIFA, cited by Archivo VAR, said the final outcome of the review “restored justice”, and underlined that it had been in direct contact with IFAB throughout the process. The law‐making body, FIFA added, agreed with the interpretation used by referees and VAR teams during the tournament.

For that reason, circular No 34 should not be viewed as a condemnation of the Embolo red card, nor was FIFA’s subsequent clarification a retreat from the decision. The post‐World Cup adjustment was framed as guidance for future competitions rather than a retroactive judgment on what happened in 2026.

Suggestions that Switzerland were “robbed” because of Embolo’s dismissal, the Spanish site concludes, overlook what it describes as the central point: under the laws as they stood, the player’s attempt to mislead the referee warranted a second yellow card, and the real injustice would have been allowing him to remain on the pitch.

Archivo VAR also notes that a similar situation occurred in the group stage match between Paraguay and the United States, when Paraguay’s Miguel Almiron was booked for trying to deceive the referee, again highlighting the tournament’s firm stance on simulation.