Lionel Messi's latest World Cup heroics have reignited familiar conspiracy theories, with critics once again accusing FIFA of favoring Argentina. But a closer examination of the tournament's biggest refereeing controversies tells a far different story.

Nearly every decision cited as evidence of corruption aligns with the Laws of the Game and established VAR protocol rather than any coordinated effort to help the defending champions.

The narrative is hardly new. Similar accusations surfaced throughout Argentina's victorious 2022 World Cup campaign, largely fueled by disappointed rival fan bases unwilling to accept Messi's crowning achievement.

Four years later, the claims have become even louder, spreading far beyond traditional football circles and dominating social media whenever Argentina takes the field.

Instead of celebrating one of the greatest players in history producing another remarkable World Cup at nearly 40 years old, much of the online discussion has centered on allegations that the tournament has somehow been engineered in Argentina's favor.

The reality, however, is far less sensational.

Algeria controversy

The first major flashpoint came during Argentina's comfortable 3-0 victory over Algeria, where Messi scored a brilliant hat trick.

The match was overshadowed by a first-half challenge in which Messi caught defender Aissa Mandi on the lower leg. Algeria's football federation formally complained to FIFA, arguing Messi should have received a red card.

Replays suggested otherwise.

While the tackle was reckless enough to warrant a yellow card, it did not satisfy the criteria for serious foul play.

Messi approached the challenge at relatively low speed, did not lunge dangerously with excessive force and made contact as Mandi stepped into the path of the sliding challenge.

Under the Laws of the Game, reckless challenges are punished with yellow cards. Red cards are reserved for tackles involving excessive force or those that clearly endanger an opponent.

Similar or even more severe incidents elsewhere in the tournament received comparable treatment, reinforcing the consistency of officiating rather than suggesting preferential treatment for Messi.

Austria debate

Questions resurfaced during Argentina's 2-0 victory over Austria after Messi opened the scoring.

Austria coach Ralf Rangnick argued Alexis Mac Allister committed a foul during the buildup.

The replay showed two players battling shoulder to shoulder for possession. Mac Allister neither pushed, tripped nor lunged at his opponent before shielding the ball and launching Argentina's attack.

The referee had an unobstructed view and immediately judged the challenge to be fair. Since there was no clear and obvious error, VAR had no grounds to intervene.

Cape Verde complaints

Argentina's knockout-stage qualification against Cape Verde produced another wave of criticism focused on three officiating decisions.

The first involved a delayed whistle after Messi was fouled.

Rather than indicating indecision, the pause reflected the proper application of the advantage rule. Referees are instructed to briefly delay their whistle to determine whether the attacking team can benefit before stopping play.

The second complaint centered on Messi taking a quick free kick before goalkeeper Vozinha had fully organized his defensive wall.

Match footage showed the referee had already blown his whistle to restart play after confirming the goalkeeper was in position. Vozinha continued adjusting his wall after play had legally resumed, making any resulting disadvantage his responsibility rather than the referee's.

Critics also questioned the three minutes of added time at the end of extra time.

Although referees may extend stoppage time when necessary, ending the match shortly after the announced minimum had elapsed falls well within standard officiating practice.

Egypt controversy

The most intense backlash arrived in the round of 16.

Argentina rallied from two goals down to defeat Egypt 3-2, prompting Egyptian players and coaches to accuse officials of manipulating the result.

The primary controversy involved a goal by Mostafa Zico that VAR overturned.

Review footage showed Marwan Attia fouled Lisandro Martínez by pulling his shirt and stepping on his foot while winning possession at the beginning of Egypt's attacking sequence.

Because Egypt retained possession throughout the entire move before scoring, the foul remained part of the same attacking phase, giving VAR full authority to intervene under the protocol.

Although some considered the foul soft, the decision itself was consistent with FIFA's interpretation of VAR procedures.

Egypt also appealed for a late penalty after Mac Allister briefly grabbed Hamdi Fathi's shirt inside the area during a corner.

Officials determined the contact was minimal and did not prevent Fathi from challenging for the ball. Similar shirt pulling routinely occurs during set pieces without resulting in penalties unless it clearly affects an opponent's ability to compete.

Another disputed incident involved Mohamed Salah going to ground inside the penalty area.

Replays indicated Argentina's defender cleanly won the ball before Salah's momentum carried him into the challenge. Neither Salah nor his teammates mounted significant protests during the match, often an indication that players themselves recognized the tackle as fair.

Argentina still needed to overcome a missed Messi penalty and capitalize on Egypt's defensive collapse after scoring three goals from open play during a decisive spell.

A pattern beyond Argentina

Supporters of the conspiracy theory frequently focus only on decisions involving Messi while overlooking officiating mistakes that benefited Argentina's opponents.

Examples throughout the tournament included questionable challenges that escaped punishment and clear yellow cards that were never issued against opposing players.

Such inconsistencies are common in football and reflect human error rather than evidence of systematic favoritism toward one team.

Echoes of 2022

Many of the current accusations mirror those made during Argentina's successful 2022 World Cup campaign.

Messi's handball against the Netherlands remains a frequent talking point despite the Laws of the Game stating that deliberate handball does not automatically require a yellow card. A booking is issued only when the offense stops a promising attack, interrupts a dangerous counterattack or provides a tactical advantage.

None of those conditions applied in that incident.

Penalty decisions against France, Croatia and the Netherlands have also repeatedly been described as gifts despite replay evidence showing defenders committed clear fouls.

Critics rarely acknowledge that Messi missed a penalty against Poland or that the referee allowed more than 10 minutes of stoppage time against the Netherlands, during which Wout Weghorst scored a dramatic equalizer.

Likewise, if officials were determined to guarantee Argentina victory in the 2022 final, France would never have been awarded two penalties that allowed Kylian Mbappé to force extra time.

The facts outweigh the theories

Argentina's run to another World Cup final has been built on outstanding football rather than favorable officiating.

The defending champions survived extra time, overcame difficult knockout opponents and relied on Messi's enduring brilliance against England to reach another title match, where they will face Spain.

Yet each victory has generated fresh conspiracy theories, many driven more by social media engagement than careful analysis of the laws governing the sport.

Every controversial decision deserves scrutiny. That is part of football. But reviewing the tournament's biggest flashpoints reveals consistent applications of the rules rather than evidence of a coordinated effort to steer Argentina toward another trophy.