FIFA has defended the dismissal of Breel Embolo in Switzerland’s World Cup 2026 quarter-final against Argentina, insisting the red card was fully in line with the refereeing guidelines in force during the tournament and not later contradicted by IFAB.
The decision came under renewed scrutiny after the publication of IFAB’s circular No. 34, which some media outlets portrayed as an implicit admission that the sending-off was a mistake. However, according to Spanish refereeing specialist outlet “Archivo VAR”, the circular was issued to refine and clarify the law, not to overturn or correct a specific World Cup decision.
During the tournament, VAR protocols allowed for intervention where there was “mistaken identity” in disciplinary sanctions. That framework enabled officials to revisit the incident in which Leandro Paredes of Argentina was initially penalised for a foul that did not occur, receiving a yellow card in the process.
On review, the referee concluded that Paredes had not been fouled and that Embolo had instead attempted to deceive the officials. The caution was therefore transferred from Paredes to Embolo for simulation.
Under the competition’s regulations, that change of identity was permitted to be checked via VAR, including all the elements needed to decide which player should be disciplined. Archivo VAR reports that this process was carried out in full accordance with the guidance agreed before the World Cup.
Post‐tournament law change
The controversy intensified only after IFAB subsequently amended the protocol. The change, introduced after the World Cup, narrowed the scope of checks for mistaken identity so that VAR could correct only which player received the card, without re‐assessing the underlying offence itself.
Archivo VAR stresses that this amendment does not retroactively invalidate how the rules were applied at the World Cup. Instead, it was designed to close what was seen as a loophole, ensuring that future reviews for mistaken identity would not extend to a full re‐evaluation of the incident.
Crucially, Embolo was already on a yellow card when he was booked for simulation, meaning he would have been sent off in any case had the laws been applied correctly from the outset. The site underlines that his conduct met the criteria for a caution, and his dismissal was therefore the logical consequence.
Initial error against Argentina
The first mistake in the sequence, according to Archivo VAR, was actually against Argentina. The referee initially awarded a non-existent foul in favour of Embolo and cautioned Paredes. Only after intervention and review was that decision overturned, with the offence for simulation attributed to the Swiss forward instead.
FIFA has stated that this final outcome “restored justice”, and that it was in constant dialogue with IFAB throughout the process. The law‐making body, FIFA says, endorsed the interpretation deployed during the tournament.
As a result, circular No. 34 should not be read as a denunciation of Embolo’s red card, nor should FIFA’s subsequent clarification be interpreted as an admission of error. The later tweak was introduced to set out how the law should operate in future, not to rewrite what happened at the World Cup.
Archivo VAR argues that suggestions Switzerland were “robbed” by Embolo’s dismissal ignore the central point: under the laws then in force, the player merited a second yellow card for simulation, and the real injustice would have been allowing him to remain on the pitch after an act of deception.
Similar case in group stage
The Spanish outlet also points to a comparable incident earlier in the tournament, during the group-stage match between Paraguay and the United States. On that occasion, Paraguay’s Miguel Almiron was booked for attempting to mislead the referee, again following a VAR intervention focused on simulation.
For FIFA and IFAB, those cases are now being used as reference points in fine‐tuning how mistaken-identity reviews should be handled going forward, but neither body accepts that the Embolo decision itself was wrong at the time it was made.
