FIFA’s head of refereeing, Pierluigi Collina, has firmly dismissed claims of bias in Argentina’s dramatic 3-2 victory over Egypt in the Round of 16 of the FIFA World Cup, insisting that match officials acted independently and in accordance with the laws of the game.
Speaking in an interview published on FIFA’s official website on Thursday, Collina defended the decisions made during the controversial encounter, which ended with Argentina staging a remarkable comeback from two goals down to secure victory through a stoppage-time strike by Enzo Fernandez.
The match sparked outrage in Egypt, with coach Hossam Hassan and the Egyptian Football Association alleging that key refereeing decisions unfairly favoured the South American side and contributed to their elimination from the tournament.
However, Collina said criticism of referees was a normal aspect of football but drew a clear distinction between legitimate debate and accusations that undermine officials’ integrity.
“With such a high number of matches played in a relatively short period of time, it is normal that some things do not go as expected,” he said.
“When that happens, they are ready to work even harder to ensure they are fully prepared for the next match.
“Of course, constructive discussion about decisions will always be part of football, but unfounded allegations have no place in our sport.”
The former Italian referee warned that baseless accusations could have serious consequences, including threats directed at referees and their families.
“Nobody can question the integrity of the FIFA World Cup match officials,” Collina said.
“Equally, nobody can claim that FIFA refereeing can be influenced by anyone, not even by the FIFA president, Gianni Infantino.
“Match officials make honest decisions and, just like players and coaches, they always try to do their best.”
Egypt’s frustrations centred on two incidents that occurred during the closing stages of the match.
The Egyptian Football Association argued that a goal scored by Mostafa Zico in the second half was wrongly disallowed following a VAR review, insisting there had been no foul in the build-up. Egyptian officials were also angered by the failure to award a foul after Mohamed Salah was challenged shortly before Argentina launched the attack that resulted in the decisive goal.
Following the defeat, Egypt coach Hossam Hassan suggested there may have been external pressure on the referee to keep Argentina in the competition, claiming his side had been denied a place in the quarter-finals.
Responding to those concerns, Collina maintained that VAR officials had correctly intervened to cancel Zico’s goal after identifying a foul by Marwan Attia on Argentina defender Lisandro Martinez during the attacking phase.
“We believe that a foul is a foul,” Collina explained.
“Regardless of whether the foul appears ‘obvious’, if the referee did not see it on the field of play, the VAR can intervene.”
He also backed the decision not to penalise Argentina in the incident involving Salah, saying both the referee and VAR agreed that the contact between the Egyptian captain and Julian Alvarez fell within the bounds of normal play.
“Stepping on an opponent’s foot is a foul, whereas a defender who touches the ball first and then makes normal football contact has not committed a foul,” Collina said.
Despite acknowledging that certain refereeing decisions can be open to interpretation, the FIFA official expressed satisfaction with the overall application of VAR throughout the tournament.
The controversy has continued to generate debate among supporters and pundits, but FIFA’s refereeing department remains adamant that the key decisions in the Argentina-Egypt encounter were made correctly and without external influence.