Everything is going down after the Argentina-Egypt game. The game was filled with controversial calls made by the referee and the VAR, and everyone has taken their chance to say that the World Cup is rigged. But one former referee thinks that this is due to how VAR has handled the calls during the World Cup.

“If you’re looking at the Zico goal and the challenge on Martinez,” said Ex-Prem referee Mark Halsey. “If that’s disallowed, for a foul on the Argentinian player Martinez, then exactly the same has got to be applied to Salah. Now, you could argue both are the same. So why hasn’t VAR got involved in the Salah incident? Because if they do, then you’ve got to give a penalty to Egypt.”

Argentina escaped with a 3-2 comeback win over Egypt, but that wasn’t the biggest story after the final whistle. Former referee Mark Halsey believes the officials created confusion by holding different standards for 2 similar challenges. 

It all started at the start of the 2nd half when Mostafa Ziko thought he had doubled Egypt’s lead after a brilliant attacking move.  

VAR stepped in and reviewed Marawan Attia’s challenge on Lisandro Martinez, and the goal was ruled out correctly. Because the Egyptian player did step on Martinez’s feet. The VAR looked at this and said that they had to rule out the goal.

Halsey accepted that the officials allowed the review as it was a foul but believed that the same should have happened with Mohamed Salah at the end of the game.

And that is what makes this call by the VAR even bigger, especially when it happened in Argentina’s penalty box.  

Julian Alvarez won possession from Salah before making contact. And the referee immediately allowed play to continue without even checking with the VAR. Seconds later, Argentina raced forward before Enzo Fernandez headed the ball to the back of the net for a dramatic winner that crushed Egyptian hopes.  

Halsey questioned why VAR carefully checked one buildup but never reviewed Salah’s penalty appeal under similar circumstances. 

The former referee did not question Argentina’s comeback or Egypt’s case for additional stoppage time. Instead, he focused on consistency, arguing that VAR should have either reviewed both incidents thoroughly or allowed both to pass without intervention. That uneven approach, he stressed, raised a more troubling question.

It left supporters asking why one attacking move received scrutiny while another went unchecked. His criticism remained firmly on officiating standards, not on any suggestion of favoritism toward Argentina. Still, the lack of clarity only deepened the sense of uncertainty.

That uncertainty has become a recurring theme throughout this World Cup, where VAR decisions have repeatedly split opinion among players, coaches, and fans. Egypt, for instance, also pointed to another moment involving Alexis Mac Allister, claiming a shirt pull near the edge of the box went unnoticed. Each disputed call has added another layer to the growing debate.

Until officials apply the same standard in every situation, these controversies will continue to cloud the game’s biggest moments. And when that happens, the conversation shifts away from football itself, which is exactly what the sport cannot afford.