The Egyptian Football Association’s referees committee is set to review VAR recordings as it investigates a disputed conversation between referee Mohamed Maarouf and Al Ahly football director Wael Gomaa during the club’s Egyptian Premier League match against Zed.
The committee, headed by Essam Abdel Fattah, will hold a meeting to hear the audio from the match as it seeks to establish exactly what was said during the incident.
The controversy centres on reports about an exchange between Maarouf and Gomaa during Al Ahly’s 2-1 victory over Zed in the second round of the league.
Abdel Fattah said Maarouf had denied claims circulating about the conversation, including an allegation that the referee had asked for a Zed player to be substituted to prevent him from receiving a red card.
The referees’ chief said he had personally contacted Maarouf to establish his version of events but stressed that the referee’s account alone would not be enough to settle the dispute.
“I spoke with Mohamed Maarouf about the incident, but he completely denied that what was rumored had happened, and he confirmed that the conversation that took place was completely different from what was being circulated.”
Abdel Fattah explained that there is a refereeing practice known as “preventive refereeing”, under which an official can warn a player who has already received a yellow card that another offence could result in a second booking and subsequent dismissal.
He said the practice forms part of recent amendments relating to refereeing.
However, Abdel Fattah insisted that the committee would examine the actual recordings before reaching any conclusion.
“We listened to Mohamed Maarouf and we will also listen to VAR. The truth is in the recordings and we want to hear the entire recording so that we know everything that happened.”
The VAR audio is therefore expected to play a central role in determining what occurred during the match and whether the conversation was consistent with Maarouf’s account.
What did Maarouf say happened?
According to the account Maarouf gave Abdel Fattah, the conversation with Gomaa was connected to an incident in which Al Ahly believed they should have been awarded a penalty.
The club’s football director reportedly challenged the referee’s decision and argued that the incident should have resulted in a spot-kick.
Abdel Fattah said Maarouf’s explanation was that the discussion did not involve asking for a Zed player to be replaced.
“The conversation that took place, according to what Mohamed Maarouf said, was due to an objection to a situation in which Al-Ahly demanded a penalty kick. The conversation was with Wael Gomaa, who said that there was a penalty kick in favor of Al-Ahly, and the referee responded to him that it was not a penalty kick, and that if the player repeated what he did, he would get a warning.”
That account directly challenges the version of events that had circulated following the match.
Rather than discussing a substitution to protect a Zed player from dismissal, Maarouf’s explanation places the exchange in the context of an argument over a possible Al Ahly penalty.
The referees committee now intends to compare that account with the VAR recordings before deciding what happened.
Zed also raises refereeing concerns
The controversy has not been limited to the exchange involving Maarouf and Gomaa.
Zed have also issued a statement objecting to some of the refereeing decisions made during the match.
Abdel Fattah said clubs were entitled to publicly express their concerns about refereeing decisions.
He stressed that Zed had the right to issue a statement or challenge decisions made during the match, just as other clubs could do.
The referees committee, he added, would respond to Zed’s complaints by analysing the specific refereeing incidents from the game.
That analysis is expected to form part of the committee’s broader assessment of the match.
For now, the focus remains on the VAR recordings and the conversation between Maarouf and Gomaa.
The committee’s decision to listen to the complete recording reflects its intention to establish the full context rather than rely solely on accounts from those involved.
Abdel Fattah has made clear that the recordings will be central to the investigation, while Maarouf has already rejected the version of events circulating publicly.
The forthcoming meeting could therefore provide an important clarification in a dispute that has quickly become one of the major refereeing controversies surrounding the early rounds of the Egyptian league season.
