The uproar over the World Cup controversy involving US President Donald Trump and FIFA head Gianni Infantino had barely begun to subside when another storm engulfed the tournament following Argentina’s contentious 3-2 victory over Egypt in their round-of-16 clash in Atlanta.

Argentina’s dramatic comeback on Tuesday was overshadowed by an unusually delayed VAR intervention that ruled out Egypt’s second goal, a decision many believe altered the course of the match before a series of contentious incidents culminated in the defending champions’ victory, Al Jazeera says in a report.

The latest dispute came just a day after FIFA drew criticism for overturning US striker Folarin Balogun’s one-match suspension after Trump publicly disclosed that he had urged the governing body to review the red-card ban.

Although Belgium went on to eliminate the hosts 4-1 despite Balogun’s reinstatement, the episode fuelled broader concerns about the integrity of decision-making at the tournament.

Trump shadow lingers over World Cup

While criticism over the Balogun affair was directed at both FIFA and Trump, Egypt’s fury after Tuesday’s defeat was aimed squarely at football’s governing body.

Head coach Hossam Hassan suggested officials had come under pressure to ensure Argentina — and, more specifically, Lionel Messi — remained in the tournament.

“Perhaps they wanted Messi to stay in the running,” Hassan told beIN Sports after the match.

“In football, there are sometimes external factors that go beyond the technical aspects. The world champions received support at every level.”

The comments have intensified debate over the growing intersection of politics and football at this year’s World Cup.

Simon Chadwick, professor of Afro-Eurasian sport at Emlyon Business School in Shanghai, said recent events had blurred the distinction between sporting and political influence.

“After the Balogun affair, who knows which decisions are legitimate and can be trusted, and which can’t?” Chadwick told Al Jazeera.

“If the Trump administration is maintaining a watching brief over the tournament, it’s worth remembering that Argentina’s president, Javier Milei, is a staunch Trump supporter.”

Trump and Milei have cultivated close political ties, with the Argentine leader frequently attending pro-Trump events in the United States.

Trump has previously described Milei as his “favourite president”.

Chadwick also suggested Hassan’s outspoken support for Palestine during the tournament may have shaped perceptions around the match, arguing that such positions can sometimes create “built-in biases” among decision-makers.

Before facing Argentina, Hassan had used his pre-match press conference to call attention to the humanitarian situation in Gaza and express solidarity with Palestinians.

VAR decision under scrutiny

The flashpoint came when VAR intervened well after play had continued to rule out Egypt’s second goal for an earlier foul, cutting the lead before Argentina completed its comeback.

Chadwick described the sequence as “distinctly unusual”, questioning why the referee had not identified the infringement immediately and why the review occurred only after Egypt had scored.

“There was something distinctly unusual about the goal and VAR decision,” he said.

He also pointed to what he viewed as inconsistent officiating, arguing that a similar infringement by an Argentine player in the build-up to one of their goals went unpunished.

“At the very least, refereeing standards during the game were somewhat inconsistent, although critics are clearly making much more serious claims,” he said.

Not everyone agreed that Egypt had been unfairly denied victory.

Football analyst Ali El Garni argued the officiating decisions were marginal rather than clear-cut.

“‘Robbed’ might be a strong word,” he said.

“I’d say decisions made by both the referee and VAR could have gone either way, and Argentina benefited from all the 50-50 incidents.”

El Garni maintained the foul that preceded Egypt’s disallowed goal was legitimate but questioned the extent to which VAR should retrospectively examine attacking moves.

He also wondered whether the same level of scrutiny would have been applied had Argentina scored under similar circumstances.

“Would the goal have been disallowed had it been scored by Argentina? It’s unlikely,” he said.

He further noted that VAR did not intervene before Argentina’s decisive third goal despite what appeared to be a foul on Mohamed Salah during the build-up.

Chadwick argued that greater transparency could help restore confidence in VAR, suggesting fans should be allowed to hear officials explain the reasoning behind controversial decisions.

“A sense of injustice was induced by the VAR decision,” he said.

“This technology was supposed to minimise doubt and bring consistency. Instead, its use during this match had significant cognitive and behavioural effects.”

He also criticised the referee’s handling of the aftermath, saying greater discretion might have helped calm emotions rather than inflame tensions.

While dismissing suggestions that the match had been deliberately manipulated in Argentina’s favour, Chadwick acknowledged the commercial significance of Messi’s continued presence at the tournament.

“There is no doubt that Messi is a box office attraction the tournament really can’t afford to be without,” he said.