Action at the World Matchplay had to be suspended during Cameron Menzies’ clash with Ross Smith as the former was taken off stage to receive medical attention – later withdrawing

Play at the World Matchplay in Blackpool had to be halted after Cameron Menzies was forced to leave the stage to receive medical attention – leading to his withdrawal from the tournament.

He was leading Ross Smith 2-1 but the fourth leg of their contest was put on hold. Before Menzies slumped over he was swaying on the stage, which caught the attention of those around him. He looked as if he was feeling faint before his discomfort became obvious.

Sky Sports presenter Emma Paton said: “We are having a break in our first match because Cameron Menzies is unwell. All we know at the moment is that he is being seen to by St John’s Ambulance. He is with some medics at the moment. Hopefully he is ok and feeling better very shortly.”

Mark Webster added on the incident: “Smith was obviously concerned. He’ll be offering his support. While the medics are seeing to Cameron, he’s got to stay on the practice board. But ultimately it’s just about hoping that Cameron is okay at the minute.”

Smith has ultimately progressed to the quarter-finals as a result of Menzies’ unfortunate illness. After Menzies’ withdrawal the night’s second match – Gian van Veen vs Wessel Nijman – has been bought forward.

There will be more to follow on this breaking news story and Mirror Sport will bring you the very latest updates, pictures and video as soon as possible. Please check back regularly for updates on this developing story. Follow us on Google News, Flipboard, Apple News, X, Facebook or visit The Mirror homepage.

There have been calls for clubs to be docked points or forfeit games if fans invade pitches in future.

The body that represents thousands of Scots cops has expressed ‘deep concerns’ that officers were left “petrified” following fan violence at a Scottish Cup tie earlier this year. The Old Firm, police chiefs and fans have been hammered in an SFA report into the scenes that marred the end of the tie in March between Rangers and Celtic at Ibrox.

The review slammed “life-threatening violence” during a pitch invasion, with officers left “petrified” of policing another game at Ibrox. David Kennedy, General Secretary of the Scottish Police Federation – which represents officers up to the rank of Chief Inspector – said: “It is deeply concerning that experienced police officers have described feeling genuinely scared while carrying out their duties.

“No officer should ever feel that their personal safety is at such risk simply for policing a football match. The review itself highlights the concern that some officers were described as being ‘petrified’ at the prospect of policing another match at Ibrox, and that should concern everyone involved in Scottish football.

“What is important now is that Police Scotland, the Scottish FA and both football clubs work together to learn the lessons from these events and implement the necessary changes. The overwhelming majority of supporters simply want to enjoy the game safely, and everyone involved has a responsibility to ensure that Police officers, stewards, players and fans are never again placed in the position they found themselves in on 8 March.

“The Scottish Police Federation is still in the process of finalising its own health and safety report into the events of that day.” Shameful scenes followed the March match, which Celtic won on penalties.

Members of the Hoops fan group the Green Brigade had forced entry to the ground without tickets. A pitch invasion by the Celtic support prompted a counter-invasion by a section of Rangers fans.

Rival supporters went on to the field, leading to police, stewards and players being assaulted and flares being thrown. The damning report by UEFA security expert Mark Blackbourne for the SFA said: “On the pitch: the confrontation between both sets of supporters, with masked home fans armed with poles and reinforced gloves, came within a very small margin of becoming a violent mass confrontation.

“The four minutes and 28 seconds it a small took to establish of control was a period in which violent serious, potentially life-threatening violence was possible.”

The report went on: “The jeopardy of extra time and penalties, the scale of the away allocation and the historical resonance of the occasion combined to produce a risk profile. Neither Rangers FC nor Police Scotland had key leads on the ground with experience of managing an away allocation of 8000 Celtic supporters at Ibrox.”

Police Scotland have to date made 37 arrests in connection with the disorder. Blackbourne said it was a post-match Glasgow City Council Safety Advisory Group meeting which recorded that time-served cops were “petrified” of policing another match at Ibrox.

He added: “That word must be read in context, not in isolation, but so qualified, it remains deeply disturbing for Scottish football. This reference demands the most serious attention from all parties with responsibility for the governance of safety and security at major football fixtures in Scotland.”

Blackbourne’s report also outlines how a 10-year-old and nine-year-old were injured by coins thrown by fans and a Rangers player was racially abused. Former player and SFA Chief Executive Gordon Smith says fans should be warned that their clubs could be docked points or have to forfeit games if they invade pitches in large numbers.

He added: “I think the fans should be told that invasion of the pitch would change the result of the match. In a league game they lose points, if is a cup game they are put out the cup even though they might win.

“I do think that would change the behaviour. They then know by doing that they are actually going against their team, their own club.

“They are actually doing a negative thing therefore that might be a way of controlling them and stopping them doing things like that if they know their club are going to suffer as a result. Any pitch invasion at all for me deserves that punishment.”

Smith also said it was a mistake by the SFA to allow so many away fans at the March cup game. He doesn’t want fans banned from Old Firm games but would prefer a reduced number being allowed into the away end for cup games as they are in league games.

Smith added: “It was a mistake to allow that. There had been a reduction in number of fans at Old Firm league games in terms of the away fans.

“I think that has been the right decision to reduce it. So there is less chance of a problem there.”

Smith continued: “We need to get to the same figures as the league are doing and the SFA have to change that for any cup matches in the future. It takes away totally from the game if there is no rival fans there.

“I am not in favour of away fans not being there. I am in favour of reduced numbers so that it is easier to control for the police.”

Chief Superintendent Rhona Fraser, vice president of The Association of Scottish Police Superintendents said: “We welcome the Blackbourne Report and the recommendations that place the collective responsibility for safety squarely on the shoulders of the fans and football clubs, supported by the authorities.

“Whilst sanctions against clubs should be a last resort, they must be swiftly implemented and sufficiently powerful to punish those offenders who bring shame on the national game. First and foremost, this is an issue for football, not the police or prosecutors.”

Police Scotland Assistant Chief Constable Alan Waddell said: “We will continue to engage with the clubs and football authorities on the recommendations contained in the report.”

Get more Daily Record exclusives by signing up for free to Google’s preferred sources. Click HERE

Oprah Winfrey has been criticised for failing to ‘challenge’ Meghan Markle’s claim that she was ‘silenced’ by the Royal Family after the broadcaster revisited their infamous 2021 interview. 

Rewatching the sit-down in a video for Vanity Fair yesterday, Oprah seemingly defended how the conversation went, saying ‘it was all for clarification.’

Royal fans on X have hit back at the veteran broadcaster for ‘backpedalling’ and trying to ‘distance’ herself from the interview with Prince Harry and Meghan, and several people asked why she didn’t question any of the Sussexes’ allegations at the time. 

The sit-down sent shockwaves around the world when it was aired on March 7, 2021, after the Duchess of Sussex claimed there had been ‘concerns’ within the Palace about the colour of their son Archie, while accusing The Firm of ‘perpetuating falsehoods about us’. 

She highlighted the ‘sad irony’ of being ‘silent’ during her time as a royal, considering ‘I’ve always been outspoken about women’s rights‘, when Oprah asked Meghan: ‘Were you silent or were you silenced?’ 

‘The latter,’ the duchess replied, explaining how ‘everyone in my world was given a very clear directive, from the moment the world knew Harry and I were dating, to say “No comment”‘. 

Five years later, Oprah told Vanity Fair she asked Meghan that because ‘I wanted to be clear’.

‘I wanted to be clear because…was she silenced? Were people telling her not to talk? That’s why I said that,’ the billionaire media mogul explained. 

‘I said it for clarification because I didn’t want, later, to hear “Well no, it wasn’t that. It really was that I was silenced.” 

‘So it was all for clarification.’ 

Assertions that Meghan never researched the Royal Family before marrying Prince Harry or that the couple were secretly wed three days before their royal wedding at St George’s Chapel in Windsor have already been contested.

Some X users felt Oprah looked ‘uncomfortable’ watching the interview with Harry and Meghan back for Vanity Fair, while others said her comments about the ‘silent or silenced’ question amounted to ‘meaningless word salad’.

Others felt the explanation was too little too late, after the veteran broadcaster did not ask the Sussexes any tough questions during the three-and-a-half-hour sit-down that was filmed in Montecito. 

One person suggested: ‘She sounds so defensive, like she’s gotten a lot of flak for her “journalism” in that so-called interview.’ 

‘It is a bad look when Oprah has to clear this up now after so many years,’ another person wrote, while a third asked why Oprah did not ask for ‘clarification’ about things like ‘getting married before the wedding’. 

The broadcaster rewatched the clips as part of Vanity Fair’s Scene Selection show, which looked at her career highlights.

The interview with Harry and Meghan – fresh off the heels of their resignations as senior royals – rocked The Firm when it aired on American network CBS in 2021.

It firmly cemented Oprah – who attended their wedding in 2018 – as an ally of the Sussexes amid their rift with King Charles and the Prince and Princess of Wales.

‘I support them 1,000 per cent,’ she had said of the pair’s move away from the UK and distancing from royal duties in the schism dubbed ‘Megxit’. 

It is thought that Meghan and Oprah were introduced through CBS and met when Oprah found herself in London.

The presenter said she previously asked for an interview with Meghan, but her request was declined with the duchess apparently telling her it was ‘not the right time’.

The ‘right time’ would eventually be March 2021, one year after Harry and Meghan quit the Royal Family and moved to Montecito. 

During the interview, which featured a number of brazen claims about their lives as senior royals, a pregnant Meghan told the American TV host: ‘I’ve always been outspoken, especially about women’s rights, and that’s the sad irony of the last four years, I’ve advocated for so long for women to use their voice.

‘And then I was silent,’ she continued, as Oprah fired back: ‘Were you silent or were you silenced?’

In the wake of the interview being aired, the Daily Mail fact-checked Meghan and Harry’s sensational claims, including the fact that the duchess was ‘silenced’ by the institution. 

On the day they announced their engagement, Meghan and Harry gave a lengthy interview to the BBC’s Mishal Husain, although the duchess reportedly complained afterwards that the journalist had not been ‘warm enough’.

On their tour of South Africa, they granted interviews to ITN’s Tom Bradby, when Meghan memorably told him: ‘Not many people have asked if I’m OK.’

Royal insiders have stressed that it was very much the case that Harry and Meghan themselves ‘called the shots’ when it came to publicity, deciding which charities to support, which engagements to go on, and which media to grant interviews to. 

One of the duchess’s former friends, Ninaki Priddy, has also previously challenged the assertion that Meghan ‘never looked up my husband online’ before she married Prince Harry. 

Ninaki, who was Meghan’s maid of honour at her first wedding to Trevor Engelson, said the Suits star was ‘always fascinated by the Royal Family. She wants to be Princess Diana 2.0’.

The mother of Suzy Ardakani, one of the duchess’s high school friends, has described how she taped Diana’s wedding and would watch it with her daughter and Meghan years later.

Oprah’s interview with Vanity Fair comes days after Buckingham Palace confirmed King Charles and Queen Camilla held a private meeting with his estranged son and daughter-in-law as well as their two children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, at Highgrove House. 

The gathering was particularly significant because it marked the first time that Meghan, Archie and Lilibet had seen the 77-year-old monarch – who is still undergoing treatment for cancer – in person since 2022.

He last saw Harry, 41, in September 2025, but was forced to publicly slap him down after Harry’s PR team falsely briefed that he had accepted an invitation to stay at Buckingham Palace during his visit to the UK earlier this month. 

Harry was visiting the UK to mark the one-year countdown to his Invictus Games 2027 in Birmingham, while Meghan, Archie, and Lilibet slipped into Britain unnoticed from their holiday home in Europe. 

Buckingham Palace refused to discuss any further details of what was described as a ‘private family occasion’ in a statement. 

Style icon Katie Holmes proved she can rock just about any trend as she enjoyed a date night with her younger new beau. 

The Dawson’s Creek alum, 47, was working a youthful style that looked as though it came from the closet of a twenty-something (or even a college student like her daughter Suri Cruise) as she stepped out with her new beau Jason Bard Yarmosky. 

From the Y2K-inspired pink tank top to the leather pants, Holmes was a vision of the latest trends. 

With a smile on her face, Holmes held hands with Yarmosky as they enjoyed a night out at the SoHo Sessions concert series in New York City on Tuesday.

Born in 1987, Yarmosky is ten years younger than Holmes but the age gap clearly hasn’t stopped the chemistry from brewing. 

Indeed, sparks were flying that evening – a source told People that the couple were kissing, hugging and holding hands as they watched Sienna Spiro perform. 

From the Y2K inspired tank top to the leather trousers, Holmes, 47, was rocking the type of outfit that could have been seen on a 20-something 

The Daily Mail has contacted a representative for Holmes for comment.  

The romance is rather new, with a source telling TMZ the couple first crossed paths at a Tribeca Festival dinner in NYC last month.

Yarmosky was born in New York and his work mainly focuses ‘on themes of aging, time, and memory – subjects the artist has been fascinated with since childhood,’ per his official website.

A graduate of the School of Visual Arts in NYC, Yarmosky’s artwork has been shown not just in the Big Apple, but internationally as well in cities such as Paris.

The actress’s new romance with the artist comes nearly four years after her split from Bobby Wooten III.

In April 2022, Holmes was romantically linked to the musician and the couple made a few public appearances together.

However, later that same year in December, it was revealed that they had gone their separate ways after eight months of dating.

At the time, a source told Us Weekly that the former couple ‘just didn’t work out together for the long run.’

The Hollywood star also briefly dated chef Emilio Vitolo Jr from September 2020 until their split the following year in May.

A separate insider said to Us Weekly that the romance ‘fizzled’ out and there had been ‘no drama.’

The new couple lovingly held hands as they made their way through the Big Apple

Advertisement

The couple enjoyed an evening at SoHo Sessions

Holmes and Vitolo Jr still remain friends and ‘really enjoyed their time together – it just simply didn’t work out.’

The actress has also been linked to Jamie Foxx and Chris Klein.

She was previously married to fellow actor Tom Cruise from 2006 until their divorce in 2012.

Last month in June, Holmes and her Dawson’s Creek castmate Joshua Jackson also put on a flirty display at the screening of their new movie Happy Hours at the Tribeca Festival in NYC.

Holmes has Suri Cruise with her ex, Tom Cruise. Above, the mother and daughter last year

Both Jackson and Holmes previously starred on the hit teen drama series, and had a short-lived relationship while filming the early seasons of the show.

In a video shared to X, both he and the actress could be seen sweetly holding hands.

‘The time that we spent together when we were young is very precious to both of us,’ the actor expressed. ‘And [it] is, like, one of the core personal and professional relationships in my life.’

Jackson further gushed that it ‘was magical’ to be a part of the project while adding, ‘And you waited for me, which I appreciated.’

Holmes also explained that her ‘working relationship’ with Jackson is ‘sacred.’

Matt Damon underwent a six-month lifestyle overhaul in order to transform into the legendary Odysseus in Christopher Nolan‘s adaptation of Homer’s The Odyssey.

But the actor, 55, who slimmed down from 200lb to 167lb for the role, admitted that one scene depicting his muscles was actually done by female stunt double Devyn Dalton.

‘When we did the forced perspective stuff of the Laestrygonians, there were these kind of stuntmen who were all seven feet,’ Damon told Happy Sad Confused podcast host Josh Horowitz in a recent interview. 

The Laestrygonians are a tribe of man-eating giants encountered by Odysseus and his crew during their decade-long journey home to Ithaca. 

In order to show the difference between the size of the giants and Odysseus, Nolan opted to use a female stunt double for Damon.

‘And then they got stuntmen who were under five feet, and so my double was a woman, a female stunt performer who had the greatest arms I’ve ever seen,’ Damon said.

The actor praised his stunt woman Devyn Dalton (pictured) for having ‘the greatest arms I’ve ever seen,’ while appearing on the Happy Sad Confused podcast

Damon praised Dalton as he recalled meeting her for the first time.

‘When she came into the catering tent, it was the first time I met her, I went up and I hugged her and I thanked her for all the work she’d put in,’ he said.

‘And so there are those shots in the movie where you see these giants looming over me and (that’s her).

‘So it was almost 100 percent my arms in the movie, but you gotta give it up where it’s due.’

The Daily Mail has reached out to Damon’s representative for comment.

Dalton confirmed her role in the film in a post she shared to her Instagram on Monday, showing some photos of her time in Scotland.

‘Scottish Highlands. The Odyssey. What an adventure. No spoilers just yet, but I’m incredibly grateful to be a part of the Laestrygonian battle. Stunt doubling the incredible @matt_damon_official,’ she wrote.

‘An epic team effort. We worked hard, shared plenty of laughs, and created memories I’ll never forget. The best part of this job is getting to venture to new places and meet amazing people along the way.’

In order to show the size difference between the film’s man-eating giants and Odysseus, Nolan opted to use Dalton (R) instead of Damon

‘When we did the forced perspective stuff of the Laestrygonians, there were these kind of stuntmen who were all seven feet,’ Damon said

‘And then they got stuntmen who were under five feet, and so my double was a woman,’ he explained

Advertisement

Dalton confirmed her role in the film in a post she shared to her Instagram on Monday, showing some photos of her time in Scotland

Fans might also recognize Dalton from the horror movie Weapons and TV show The Last Of Us.

Damon recently spoke about the lifestyle changes he made to transform into the legendary Greek king of Ithaca.

‘It was more about just getting really, really physically fit, which just really involves changing your diet, just a whole lifestyle change,’ he said in his People cover story.

‘You have to just be very, very intentional about everything you’re putting in your body.’

Damon – who relies on fitness trainer Jason Walsh – gave up gluten ‘among other things’ but he made sure to do it all safely.

‘I didn’t change it in an unhealthy way,’ The Rip producer-star noted.

‘I think if I had done the opposite and put weight on, that would have been dangerous and it’s not something I’ll do anymore. I was happy to do it earlier in my life.’

The two-time Golden Globe winner also said The Odyssey was ‘the most challenging movie I’ve ever been a part of’ and it marked his third time being directed by Nolan after Oppenheimer and his 2014 sci-fi epic Interstellar. 

The ensemble cast includes Tom Holland, Anne Hathaway, Robert Pattinson, Lupita Nyong’o, Zendaya, Charlize Theron, Jon Bernthal, John Leguizamo, Mia Goth, Elliot Page, Samantha Morton, James Remar and Travis Scott. 

Damon’s transformation earned praise from Theron, who couldn’t stop gushing about the muscles he developed for the role.

‘I’ve seen him without all of that suit on. He’s incredible. Incredible,’ she told ET in an interview promoting the epic.

‘I’m like staring at him weirdly. I’m looking at his a** right now. I shouldn’t do that! That’s just wrong. He looked amazing, yes.’

The film sailed straight to the top of the North American box office over the weekend, bringing home $124.5million in its opening weekend; Damon seen in a still with Zendaya 

Earlier this month, the official X account for The Odyssey was forced to restrict comments after conservatives bombarded it with complaints and racist comments regarding the film’s diverse cast members.

However, despite the early backlash, The Odyssey achieved a near-perfect score on review-aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes shortly after its release.

The film sailed straight to the top of the North American box office over the weekend, bringing home $124.5million in its opening weekend.

It captured another $139million in overseas sales for a total of $263.5million, surpassing its $250million budget.

The Bollihope Burn Birch, a downy birch perched off a cliff edge in Stanhope, Weardale, has made the final ten shortlist for the prestigious national competition from the Woodland Trust.

Public voting opens today (July 23), giving people across the region the chance to back the County Durham entry as it competes for the title.

The annual contest celebrates and raises awareness of rare, ancient or at-risk trees across the country, with this year’s theme, “against all odds”, chosen to spotlight nature’s great survivors.

Of the ten shortlisted trees, a panel of experts selected eight, while the public chose two additional wildcard entries.

The Bollihope Burn Birch tree in Stanhope is one of the UK’s (Image: James Reader/Woodland Trust/PA Wire)

David Oakes, actor, nature podcaster and Woodland Trust ambassador, said the shortlist showcases how differently trees endure hardship compared with creatures that can simply move away.

“Most things survive by fleeing,” he said.

“A tree, rooted for life to a single patch of ground, doesn’t get that option.

“So trees have perfected the opposite: the art of weathering whatever arrives.

“But a few are frankly show-offs.”

He added that all ten nominees, including the County Durham birch, had “defied the odds in extraordinary ways, from clinging to cliffs and church towers, to enduring collisions and cannonballs.”

The Bollihope Burn Birch faces stiff competition from trees with equally dramatic backstories.

They include the “Bomber Oak” in Rutland, struck by a Second World War Lancaster bomber and later nearly lost to a water company’s pipe-laying works.

Also included is the Crowhurst Yew in East Sussex, thought to be up to 4,000 years old, which survived a direct hit from a Civil War cannonball, later dug up by villagers in 1820.

Other rivals for the crown include Northern Ireland’s “Bendy Tree”, a wych elm on Newcastle’s seaside promenade that grows almost horizontally after more than a century of coastal winds, and a 200-year-old yew growing from the top of a church tower in Culmstock, Devon.

The list is completed by the lightning-struck “Earlstoun Lightning Oak” in Dumfries and Galloway, the Wales Coast Path Oak in Ceredigion, and Brighton’s “Preston Twin”, believed to be the world’s oldest English elm.

The two public wildcard picks are the Balloch Castle ash by Loch Lomond, which has weathered lightning strikes, storms, disease and even an Oasis concert, and the Donnington Oak in West Berkshire, which stood unscathed through the siege of Donnington Castle in the Civil War.

People can vote for the Bollihope Burn Birch, or any of its rivals, via the Woodland Trust website until late September, with the winner announced in early October before going on to represent the UK in the European Tree of the Year finals.

May Chemais, who runs the Ancient Tree Inventory at the Woodland Trust, said: “Trees can be both tough and flexible, as the shortlist proves.

“We hope people will enjoy discovering all the incredible stories of resilience behind our nominees this year.”

?

Select your team for football news tailored to you

Lionel Messi‘s popularity among British people has plummeted after Argentina’s shameful World Cup antics. 

Messi is now viewed unfavourably among almost half of the participants surveyed by YouGov. 

It comes after Argentina’s baseless behaviour at the tournament, which ended with them losing 1-0 to Spain in the final and starting fights with the opposition. Enzo Fernandez was sent off in normal time and Leandro Paredes was lambasted for attacking Eric Garcia and Gavi after the match. 

Even Messi was dragged into their pathetic antics in the final, attempting to get Marc Cucurella sent off for briefly putting his hand over his mouth. 

As per FIFA’s rules for this tournament, if a player holds their hand over their mouth in a confrontational situation, they will be sent off. That was the case with Paraguay’s Miguel Almiron and Ecuador’s Piero Hincapie. However, it didn’t appear that Cucurella was speaking in a confrontational manner and neither the referee nor VAR decided to intervene. 

Moreover, many supporters felt throughout the tournament that matches were ‘rigged’ to Argentina’s benefit due to the quantity of refereeing decisions in their favour.

His attempt to get Marc Cucurella sent off for a minor infraction was viewed as pathetic 

And Argentina’s players did not endear themselves to the English public by insisting that the Falkland Islands belong to them in a series of chants and banners. 

All of this has had a deleterious effect on Messi’s popularity. 

Coming into the World Cup, he was viewed favourably by 55 per cent of the public and unfavourably by just nine per cent.

Now, he is seen favourably by only 29 per cent and unfavourably by 44 per cent.

That means that, according to YouGov’s poll, Messi’s net favourability rating among Britons has fallen from +46 to -15. In short, people don’t like him very much.

His score is far worse than his arch-rival Cristiano Ronaldo, whose net rating is -2. 

And he certainly lost his stock with Daily Mail Sport’s veteran columnist Jeff Powell, who bunged Messi out of his top five all-time players for his antics. 

In fairness, Messi, who scored eight goals throughout the World Cup, was often a beautiful and refreshing counterpoint to his more thuggish team-mates.

Messi avoided a red card for an apparent stamp during Argentina’s first game vs Algeria

He also rose off the floor to shake Lamine Yamal’s hand after the whistle on Sunday, when other team-mates were picking fights. Argentina also turned their backs on the victors during their trophy celebration. 

Spain beat Argentina 1-0 after extra-time thanks to a 106th-minute winner from Ferran Torres.

Any accusations of refereeing favouritism towards Argentina in the final were quelled by the sending-off of their midfielder Enzo Fernandez in the dying minutes of normal time.

But many people found it inexplicable that Spain’s Nico Williams had a goal ruled out for a dubious foul on Nicolas Otamendi in the build-up.

That followed a pattern of questionable decisions made in favour of Argentina throughout the tournament.

Lionel Messi arguably should have been punished for a stamp in Argentina’s first group match against Algeria – but he escaped a card entirely.

Messi, who scored a hat-trick in the match, caught Algeria captain Aissa Mandi on his right calf and Achilles tendon with his studs in a challenge after his first goal.

Algeria were given a free-kick by the referee but the incident was not even reviewed by VAR officials.

Meanwhile, Egypt reacted explosively after a string of critical decisions went against them in their last-16 match against Argentina.

Egypt manager Hossam Hassan furiously accused FIFA of rigging the World Cup after his side were knocked out by Argentina 

Advertisement

Switzerland accused referee Joao Pinheiro of giving Argentina ‘every decision’ 

Lautaro Martinez avoided a booking for jumping into the crowd after scoring his goal against Switzerland

First, forward Mostafa Ziko had a goal ruled out after a VAR review because of an apparent foul by Marwan Attia on Lisandro Martinez. That foul had occurred 18 seconds before at the other end of the pitch. Attia definitely caught Martinez – the debate is over whether not giving anything was a clear and obvious error.

What Egypt were more furious about is the build-up to Argentina’s winning goal. They contend that they should have had a penalty at the other end moments before.

Mohamed Salah was brought down inside the box after having his foot clipped by Julian Alvarez, but VAR did not even seem to check the incident. Argentina had gone the other end and scored, in stoppage-time no less – but Egypt should admit that their defending was shoddy.

Pharaohs manager Hossam Hassan was apoplectic in his post-match interview. ‘We were better, but football is unfair,’ he said.

‘It could be a matter of marketing, they could want to make a World Cup with the champion of the last World Cup, they want Messi to exist (in the tournament).

He added later: ‘Why isn’t there any fairness in sport? In football? I do not want to try to put it nicely here with beautiful wording. We have been treated unfairly today. We have suffered injustice.’

Moreover, Switzerland were incandescent after their quarter-final defeat by Argentina, accusing the referees of being ‘one-sided’ and ‘against’ them.

The major controversy of the match is the dismissal of Breel Donald Embolo with a second yellow card after diving.

Argentina consistently referred to the Falkland Islands throughout the World Cup 

Argentina midfielder Leandro Paredes was initially given a yellow card for a foul on Embolo. However, referee Joao Pinheiro was then instructed to review the decision by VAR under a new ‘mistaken identity’ rule.

The review showed that Embolo had initiated the contact with Paredes, leaving his right leg trailing to make contact with the Argentine, before tumbling to his left. The rule allows for a decision to be changed in the event a player has been booked or sent off, but the infringement was actually committed by the opposition.

Embolo was the one at fault for simulation, and so he was shown a second yellow. The striker was in tears after becoming the first player to be caught out by the rule, but it was clearly the right call.

Nevertheless, after the game, multiple figures from the Swiss camp stepped forward to air their grievances.

Granit Xhaka said: ‘If you have to lose because of one decision from the referee, it’s painful but it was his decision. It’s difficult to accept now after a game because the dressing room was very quiet, disappointed. If you are disappointed after the game against this Argentina team, it shows a big mentality.

‘The rules are the rules and we can’t change them but it’s a decision where you kill the game. That’s my opinion. I don’t know what else he can do but just don’t kill the game. We were so good in the game. I believed that at 11 versus 11 we would have had them but it’s very difficult to find the right words after the game.’

Defender Manuel Akanji said: ‘When you have the referee against you, it becomes difficult. Every little thing was called against us. Every dive and every foul by the Argentinians went unpunished. I don’t usually say anything against the officials, but I’ve never experienced such a one-sided game as today.

‘As soon as the game was over, I thought: I’m so proud of our team. What we’ve achieved throughout the entire tournament, and especially today… We played against the world champions, and they didn’t stand a chance.

FIFA have strenuously denied accusations of ‘rigging’ the World Cup in Argentina’s favour

‘I can’t recall a single scoring opportunity from open play where we were lucky. If the game had continued 11 against 11, it would have likely gone in our favour.’

Team-mate Remo Freuler said: ‘We had high hopes and put in a superb performance until the red card. That, of course, disrupted our flow. I still don’t understand how VAR can intervene in such a situation. FIFA needs to explain that to me.’

Manager Yakin added: ‘After the equaliser, we clearly had the momentum on our side. Unfortunately, this was punished by a refereeing error. The referee shouldn’t have given the Argentinian a yellow card in that situation.

‘There’s no reason for it; the incident wasn’t malicious or rough or anything like that. Then he corrects his own mistake and punishes us. That’s incomprehensible and beyond my comprehension.

‘The decision is baffling to me, there was no reason for it. It’s a shame.’

Finally, Argentina have so far avoided punishment from FIFA despite their repeated chants referring to the Falkland Islands.

FIFA’s rules strictly prohibit political chanting, slogans, and banners inside tournament venues. Haiti were forced to remove a small reference to their independence war on their kits just days before the tournament.

After the semi-final against England, Argentina’s players held up a banner saying that ‘Las Malvinas son argentinas’ – The Falklands are Argentine. They may face disciplinary action for this, but didn’t ahead of the final against Spain.

The Argentinians even got support from the US government over that. Andrew Giuliani, the head of the White House FIFA task force, said: ‘We believe in our First Amendment rights here in the United States of America.’

Trust has been low in FIFA for a long time and their decision to suspend USA forward Folarin Balogun’s ban so that he could play against Belgium after a phone call from Donald Trump did not help to restore confidence.