Top News

10 July 2026

As the 2026 World Cup enters its final phase, attention has turned not only to the players’ performances but also to the referees chosen for key matches.

This week, FIFA’s referee selections have sparked debate, especially after an all-Argentine officiating crew was assigned to France’s 2-0 victory over Morocco on Thursday evening.

Fans online questioned the decision, noting that France could potentially face Argentina in the final — a repeat of the 2022 World Cup showdown.

FIFA also confirmed that English referees Anthony Taylor and Michael Oliver are not eligible to officiate matches involving Argentina, due to sensitivities surrounding the Falklands War that took place 44 years ago.

Here’s a detailed Q&A on how FIFA selects referees for the World Cup.

The main factor influencing referee appointments at the World Cup is overall performance. Referees are typically paired with two assistant referees, forming a team that works together throughout the tournament.

This process is overseen over several years by the FIFA Referees Committee, chaired by former World Cup final referee Pierluigi Collina, widely regarded as one of the greatest officials in football history.

While consistency and accuracy in decision-making take precedence, geopolitical considerations also play a role.

Referees cannot officiate matches involving their own national teams. FIFA confirmed to The Independent that no referee will be assigned to a game that could directly affect their home country’s progress in the tournament.

For instance, an English referee would not oversee a group stage match like Panama vs Croatia if it were in England’s group. Similarly, an English referee would not handle Argentina vs Switzerland this weekend, since the winner could face England in the semi-finals.

This policy, however, only applies to immediate next-match consequences. That explains why an Argentine referee crew officiated France’s 2-0 quarter-final win over Morocco, even though Argentina could meet France in the final.

FIFA generally prefers referees from neutral confederations. For example, if an African team faces a South American one, a European referee might be assigned. In matches between two European teams — such as Spain vs Belgium — a European referee, like England’s Michael Oliver, is acceptable.

Other factors also come into play, including geopolitical sensitivities. For example, an American referee would not be assigned to officiate a match involving Iran, given the tense relations between the two countries.

FIFA applies discretion and common sense when making these decisions, aware of political sensitivities. A source described the appointment process as “quite fluid”.

A FIFA spokesperson confirmed that the 1982 Falklands War is still considered when assigning referees. Consequently, English referees are not assigned to Argentina’s matches or to any game that could directly affect Argentina’s progression, and vice versa.

This means it is increasingly unlikely that an English referee, whether Michael Oliver or Anthony Taylor, will officiate the final, as both England and Argentina are in the same half of the knockout bracket.

The Falklands War remains a sensitive issue, further highlighted when Argentina’s players sang “Muchachos”, a song referencing the “Malvinas” — Argentina’s name for the South Atlantic islands — after their win over Egypt.

Conflicts older than that, such as the Second World War, no longer influence FIFA’s referee selections. For example, a German referee could officiate a match featuring England.

There have been instances in the past when geopolitical sensitivities were not applied in the same way. Argentine referee Horacio Elizondo took charge of England’s 2006 World Cup quarter-final loss to Portugal — a match remembered for Wayne Rooney’s controversial red card following a clash with Ricardo Carvalho.

FIFA could not confirm why the Falklands War guidance was not in place two decades ago.