The Iranian-born referee has been assigned to the final of 2025 FIFA Club World Cup.
.jpg)
Sunday 13 July 2025, 21:00 CET
MetLife Stadium, East Rutherford
Chelsea (ENG) - Paris Saint Germain FRA
Referee: Alireza Faghani IRN/AUS
Assistant Referee 1: Anton Shchetinin AUS
Assistant Referee 2: Ashley Beecham AUS
Fourth Official: Facundo Tello ARG
Fifth Official: Gabriel Chade ARG
Video Assistant Referee: Bastian Dankert GER
Assistant Video Assistant Referee: Tatiana Guzman NCA
Support Video Assistant Referee: Ivan Bebek CRO
*yawn*
ReplyDeleteThis was the easiest tournament to predict, as said, Collina used it for his satisfaction with Marciniak and Faghani.
ReplyDeleteLet me clarify, I say that with respect, but in the end most or everything was already planned before kick off (indeed Faghani with the opener...). This is surely not respectful for other referees, they just took part in a rather "Big Brother..." show :)
Just remember the clear second YC he missed in an opener. If it were about meritocracy, he would be on his way home after the group stage. But not giving a second YC to host Miami is rewarded with a final. What a great message to the rest of the referees.
DeleteI must confess that these appointments surprise me quite a bit: If Pierluigi Collina had already planned to nominate Alireza Faghani for the final in advance, he didn't necessarily have had to assign him the opening match as well. I had rather expected that this tournament could be used to promote new talents with an eye on the World Cup next year, or to give Tori Penso a stronger representation as a female referee. While the actual appointments may have been largely merit-based (which is certainly worth mentioning positively), I had rather expected that FIFA would be more inclined to 'test' rather than rely on the veterans.
DeleteExcellent game for Faghani, deserved. Consistent performances through championship, alongside with Tello and Abatti. Path for him to WC Final 2026.
ReplyDeleteI was expecting because he is the best referee in the tournament until fourth official
ReplyDeleteFaghani planned for final with opener? I don't think so - I expected a way like Orsato WC 2022 - opener, important match and sonorous SF.
ReplyDeleteOtherwise, a deserved prize for long-time career with recognition by Collina.
Any chances for WC final 2026? I don't think so, specially that Faghani is Iranian while a WC will be in US. A unique chance was lost in 2018.
Y este no se juega en Estados Unidos ?
DeleteUS - United States. I can't see a option when Iranian will be a main referee a huge tournament hosted by US, specially after political circumstances from last two months.
DeleteWhat is the relationship between he is from Iran and the final is held in America??
Delete@Abdiaziz ahmed yousuf: I think "fest" is referring to the explosive political situation between Iran and the USA. In the 1998 World Cup, there was exactly this clash in the group stage - it was officiated by Urs Meier from (the politically neutral) Switzerland.
DeleteIt seems that some forget that Faghani has an Australian passport...
DeleteIMO it's too easy in hindsight to argue that everything was planned.
ReplyDeleteE.g., you could also have made the same argument of a certain path, if Tello or Abatti had been appointed.
Furthermore, I don't think, that it was planned to have 4 UEFA / 2 AFC / 1 CONMEBOL / 0 CONCACAF appointments in the last 7 games.
Interesting, that Dankert was not among the reported names to have stayed at the tournament.
ReplyDeleteAl Marri probably wasn't possible due to the Qatar/PSG connections. Guzman could have been an option, but apparently they wanted some UEFA representation in the match officials team.
VAR appointments (VAR/AVAR/SVAR)
ReplyDeleteGallo: 6/4/0
Brisard: 4/3/1
Soto: 4/2/1
Dankert: 4/0/5
Kwiatkowski: 4/0/5
Bebek: 3/5/2
Pacheco: 3/4/2
Dieperink: 3/3/4
di Bello: 3/3/2
Lara: 3/2/3
Al Marri: 3/1/5
Guzman: 3/1/5 (so her only AVAR game is the final)
del Cerro Grande: 3/0/6
Evans: 2/5/2
Mastrangelo: 2/5/0
Miranda: 2/5/0
Gonzalez: 2/3/2
Ashour: 2/2/2
El Fariq: 2/2/2
van Driessche: 1/5/1
Hernandez: 1/3/5
Villareal: 1/2/3
Ming: 1/2/2
Mohammed: 1/1/3
I am one of Faghani’s biggest supporters and this feels like justice for 2018 and to a lesser extent 2022 where he was thrown under the bus.
ReplyDeleteBUT missing a blatant second yellow in the opener should have ruled him out of the final, clearly a predetermined appointment
+1
Deleteexcellent and fair reward given his career (and the WC final he should have been assigned to in 2018) but undeserved at this specific tournament
One should also try to understand more about Bebek, honestly it's impossible to read his situation, disappeared in UEFA, he was trusted VAR for a while, but still keeping the big reputation by Collina.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the truth? Who is good and who is not in a role? Impossible to understand. OK, maybe I'm making things too easy, but definitely today in modern refereeing it seems that the preferences of the heads of refereeing are very often more important than technical outcomes.
To follow, Guzman was praised in public by Collina and she is there as well. I have nothng against them but I observe the modern trend of refereeing, in which in my humble opinion, the very strict and harsh assessments of the past have been totally abandoned.
Rosetti and Collina are fundamentally very different leaders. It seems to me that Collina has a stronger eye for the technical aspects of refereeing and pays close attention to which referee style best suits a particular match. He also appears to treat veteran referees with a greater degree of respect and continuity. The notable exception is Letexier being preferred over Turpin. However, Collina also has his clear favorites — and those favorites are often not the same as Rosetti’s. Referees who enjoy what one might call “Collina love” can go remarkably deep in a tournament, with their path sometimes feeling “predetermined”.
ReplyDeleteRosetti, too, has his preferred referees, but he tends to be overly focused on keeping everyone satisfied. Unfortunately, he is also too often used as a puppet by Čeferin. Moreover, Rosetti has imho a reputation to consciously sacrifice referees (“throwing them under the bus”) in order to protect others.
That said, Alireza Faghani’s path to the final does not feel predetermined to me. An opening match appointment can just as easily serve as a form of compensation, especially when the referee is not seen as a top-tier candidate from the outset. It’s a prestigious assignment, but not necessarily an indication of a predetermined final.
The way things evolved now, I would say that CONMEBOL has a very strong chance of delivering the referee for the 2026 World Cup final (depending on the teams ofc).
A quote from Collina from FIFA.com: “It was a great competition. The people attending the matches confirm this, it was well played by players and well refereed by match officials.”
ReplyDeleteI just completely disagree, particularly with the well played by players part. The player behavior at this tournament has been nothing short of disappointing and shameful. You could make a 20+ minute long compilation video just of incidents of blatant dissent from this tournament. The refereeing was incredibly permissive of technical offenses such as the aforementioned dissent and delaying the restart, etc. as well as some physical offenses missed (which is more understandable). I don’t remember one time “only the captain” with the official signal was used in the tournament, and I watched a majority of the matches. I really hope this is not due to any instructions to be lenient by Collina, but I fear it is, because it was rather universal across all matches, still with some referees doing better than others. Also it must be mentioned that from an American perspective of those who do not like or do not watch football/soccer, one of the main reasons I hear is “the players dive, fake injuries, complain, and whine all the time” there was no shortage of that in this tournament, which does not help FIFA with the World Cup coming up as far as filling their empty stadiums and attracting new football fans.
Collina also spoke about the referees perspective using the particular camera. Too many trivial things, it follows the usual logic of always speaking positively about what has been done and tested. From this point of view, refereeing, even at international level, will always remain self-referential, because saying the opposite in public is not possible (just recall also Rosetti's rather questionable words about Euro 2024).
DeleteOf course, there are some positive points, but many of the things Collina mentioned should have been evident much earlier than after this tournament.
I feel good for Faghani, his first final since 2019 (!) which is amazing, considering his status and reputation.
ReplyDeleteBeath’s assistants repeating final after 2022…Curiously, they will face Chelsea again in a final ;)
Agree that Bebek’s situation is very strange…Nothing in UEFA but a big trust by Collina (If i’m not wrong he was part of the VAR team in the Olympic W final as well) so i don’t know what to think TBH.
Yes, congrats also to Anton and Ashley for being appointed to their 2nd Club World Cup Final after their first one in 2022.
DeleteAs others have said, this is a deserved career reward, but very much undeserved in this tournament. I'd like to think if this was the proper World Cup, such a decision would not have been made, but with Collina, can we ever be truly sure :-)
ReplyDeleteI also don't think it's a bad idea to use non-Uefa referees where possible in these sorts of games, as it at least leaves the option open for finals where they are really needed, and hopefully quells political pressures from other associations for a little while
VAR Dankert, he deserves it. He seems to be highly valued by both FIFA and UEFA.
ReplyDeleteIn my humble opinion.
ReplyDeleteAlireza Faghani (IRN/AUS) reminds me of what Carlos Batres (GUA) once was for the FIFA Referee Committee.
A veteran referee who has earned his stripes and who is trusted by the Referee Committee as a safe pair of hands.
An intelligent referee who relies on vast experience to do just enough to get through matches and to steer clear of major troubles.
A referee who is nowhere near the peak physical ability they once had.
A referee who continues to receive top notch assignments based more so on past glories than on present form.
Thank you, that is all.
I’ve seen a lot of criticism suggesting that FIFA had more or less mapped out referee appointments in advance - predetermined paths, unless someone’s performance dipped below par (for example, Kovács).
ReplyDeleteAnd I understand that criticism, because it gives the impression that not every official had an equal shot at the final from the start.
But compare that to the messy appointments at the Women’s Euros, where an assistant referee could get Poland three matches in a row, or where Demetrescu, Pesu, and Klarkund were repeating countries already in the group stage. That should be easily avoidable, especially in a world with smart scheduling tools and modern technology.
In that sense, FIFA did a better and more balanced job. The officials with full UEFA appointments were also given intercontinental matches. A lower-profile assignment was balanced out with a higher-profile one; see Turpin, for example.
Pls let me say: Thanks for your interesting opinions and the rich discussion as well I read consequently: I learned very much from all of them, particolarly becouse of coming from from different latitudes, experience and world areas !
ReplyDeleteIMO: Concurring with @Anonymous comments, I'd like to add a few considerations.
To officiate at FIFA matches, one must have acquired adequate experience in the respective Continental Confederations, including UEFA.
It's therefore clear—looking at the differences between Collina's and Rosetti's perspectives—that Rosetti at UEFA seeks to scout and develop young referees, give them experience, and make them reliable for FIFA assignments.
Collina portfolio therefore naturally includes experienced referees of varying ages; here, there's the need on the one hand to develop the performance of the younger referees by gradually using them in increasingly complex matches, and on the other to ensure consistency between the referee's reliability and experience and the complexity of the match.
Now, none of us could be in Collina's mind, and it's certainly possible and legitimate that he had already drawn up a list of potential ref finalists at the start of the tournament: but with the flexibility that can depend on the specific performances of each referee in the tournament, the possible overperformance of any referees not initially included in the list, and the country of the teams in the final.
I believe this is completely normal, and vice versa, it wouldn't be normal if a FIFA Comm/Ref Chief didn't have ideas clear enough before this tournament.
Vincic was probably also on the list, but might have been later excluded from the F/SF for not have living up to expectations.
That said, I find nothing strange about the designation of Faghani, who has experience and reliability unlike very few other referees in the world. And that - being 47 years old - I doubt he'll be able to participate in the 2026 WC.
Finally, I'd add that refereeing the opening match doesn't always bring luck: think of Nishimura/JAP (IFC World Ref Award 2012) who was sidelined after a disastrous Croatia-Brazil match in WC 2014, of Orsato/FRA's less than convincing Qatar-Ecuador match in WC 2022, or of Turpin/FRA's disconcerting Scotland-Germany match in EU 2024.
Faghani, on the other hand, refereed very well, broke the spell, and the final can rightfully be considered his.
Correct: Orsato /ITA (not /FRA). Sorry.
ReplyDeleteFinally, if I may, I would add that I agree with Collina's statement about the average to high quality of refereeing in this tournament. Simply because it's true.
ReplyDeleteA referee has to be judged by the correctness or otherwise of his approach to the match, his reading of its events, his modulation of technical and disciplinary interventions in relation to key moments, and his intelligence in managing them; he isn't judged by a foul detected or not, or by a higher or lower YC if, in an overall evaluation, they are of marginal importance.
From this perspective, the standard of refereeing was good, indeed very good.
Some of you have criticized an excessive tolerance of protests or simulations; maybe, but we must consider two aspects.
First: the FIFA CWC is an international tournament with only a few matches for each team, and the weight of a disciplinary measure is different from that of a national championship; this requires particular attention in evaluating and adopting sanctions, which must be modulated and, above all, preceded by adequate warning and prevention activities.
Second: the teams come from all over the world, from leagues where player approaches, competitive spirit, protests, and player animosity are handled by referees according to the standards of those leagues. I find it extremely unrealistic (and wrong) to apply a European standard of judgment to a match involving South American teams, or vice versa.
From this perspective, the most difficult task for a European is to referee, for example, matches involving only South American teams (and vice versa), or matches between South American and European teams, precisely because the competitive spirit of the players and the referee's standard of judgment have different imprints.
That said, the most difficult matches (at least on paper) were those entrusted to Letexier: the Brazilian derby and the SF Chelsea-Fluminense match. And Letexier was globally excellent in both matches, precisely because he knew how to adopt a standard of judgment and tolerance intelligently consistent with the continental habits of these teams, without the biases he derived from his UEFA experience.
Now the F match will not be easy for Faghani either, and he will have to draw on his poise and long experience to calibrate his approach correctly rather than to trust in his authority name force only.
You don’t adapt to teams. Teams adapt to the laws of the game. A referee should never allow dissent and mobbing because those teams do that in their leagues. That has nothing to do with good refereeing.
DeleteNo, dear VG. It isn’t so. Absolutely.
DeleteI didn’t write that a referee must adapt to the teams. But he must understand the right approach considering the teams, key moments, timing etc.
DeleteThe Laws are the same always, the capability of their interpretation not for all the referees making the difference and ranking among them.
Dear ITAREF, reading your thoughts makes me happy, your interpretation of the referee's performance is amazing, I attach your words superbly describing how a performance should be considered :"A referee has to be judged by the correctness or otherwise of his approach to the match, his reading of its events, his modulation of technical and disciplinary interventions in relation to key moments, and his intelligence in managing them; he isn't judged by a foul detected or not, or by a higher or lower YC if, in an overall evaluation, they are of marginal importance." I stand up and applaud you for a long time.
ReplyDeleteThanks so much 👍
DeleteReally bad foul detection in the first 12 minutes that already started to irritate the players.
ReplyDeleteNot clear what happened after the goal, a confrontation started. Maybe a gesture during celebration?
ReplyDeleteHe is so far away from the play!!
ReplyDeleteAgain a booking given by Faghani because he got annoyed…
ReplyDeleteHe’s always been like that. It usually works for him and can be accepted in the LOTG. Its not just random
DeleteFaghani’s 1H just feels like someone having a walk on the pitch, randomly deciding that this is a foul but that is not, and that this is worth a YC and that is not. Not convinced at all.
ReplyDeleteAlireza Faghani is the only referee at this whole tournament who has cared to punish dissent.
ReplyDeleteI mean, Kovacs did, and Faghani spent his entire first match ignoring super blatant dissent continuously, but apart from that...
DeleteGood yc's from faghani. Finally a ref decide to take action for verbal abuse.
ReplyDeleteVery bad disciplinary control/management by Faghani… 2 YC not correct. For the first YC you need more management, and the second YC is totaly crazy… Wich criteria for the second YC ?
ReplyDeleteNow third YC for Chelsea… correct YC but 3 YC for Chelsea and nothing for PSG
The first YC was definitely unnecessary in the final and would require better game management. The second YC was fully deserved and correctly given – at first glance it didn’t seem like dissent, but the replay showed he kicked the ball away aggressively. The third YC absolutely clear. Maybe it ended up 3:0 in yellow cards, but so what?
DeleteBut OF not very convincing performance, i just dont see a problem in cards :)
Deletesecond yc is crystal clear
DeleteIMO, Unfortunately Faghani in 1H seemed rather uncertain: his technical decisions were inconsistent (which affected his credibility), he lacked discipline, and despite some serious fouls, he failed to use any prevention or warning techniques. Behaviorally, he appeared to be rather unfocused.
ReplyDeleteWell, law 7.2 is clearly being disregarded. Not sure the point of a law if Fifa show such utter disdain to it
ReplyDeleteReading some of the comments above, PSG hasn’t deserved a card - that’s why they haven’t got any. The Neto YC looked a bit unclear (not necessarily wrong) but everything else was fine. Fitness not the best anymore but he’s 15 years older than everyone else on the field what do you expect
ReplyDelete25 minutes of HT.
ReplyDeleteApparently Faghani decided it was enough of YCs for dissent. The biggest dissent so far (Palmer in 53') gets unpunished.
ReplyDeleteAfter the opening game, Faghani turned a blind eye to another SYC (66’).
ReplyDeleteThat’s a bad miss imo. Clear 2YC. And he probably knew just decided he didn’t want to give it
DeleteSecond yc missed for neto
ReplyDeleteThis is a bad joke. Pierlugi, if you are reading this, it's time to retire.
ReplyDeleteIf that's not a 2nd yellow for Neto, then nothing is. Clear and obvious mistake. You could tell even Neto knew..
ReplyDeleteCome on now,Neves has to be booked,this kind of behaviour is unaccaptable.
ReplyDeleteHas he left his cards inside at half time? This isn’t a good second half. AR1 had missed 2 offsides aswell
ReplyDeleteSo we already forgot about the 8s rules or what ?
ReplyDeleteIt was forgotten after day one. The worst rule they ever came up with. The refs don’t count with their fingers and we still see 15-16 seconds with no action taken. Ridiculous by IFAB to claim that this was successful before it was officially in the laws of the game.
DeleteMissed yellow to PSG player .
ReplyDeletePushing player after whistle was gone.
Velasco in Brazil-Colombia management of a mass confrontation (82’) is the cherry on top of this performance 😀.
ReplyDeleteHe doubled down (+95’) on this strategy too! Pretty embarrassing performance by Faghani for a final, DB is 100% correct.
Delete82’ great management, players will always play if you make them
ReplyDeleteIgnoring to punish the mass confrontation appropriately? Mmmz, the problem is solved for the short term, but not for the next phase of the game…
DeleteNothing serious happened. Late in the game it’s better to let go. But the rest of the second half has been bad, at least he hasn’t influenced the result
DeleteAnd now clear RC missed,to same Neves that should have been booked 10 mins earlier.
ReplyDeleteThis is slowly but surely becoming a disaster.
ReplyDeleteMaybe I'm picky,and in position to judge,but that RC should have been shown right away,not after VAR
ReplyDeleteIn no position to judge😀
Delete84' I'm really struggling to understand how a YC can be given there. He either didn't see it, so can't give anything, or saw the hair pull, and ignored VC. Simple for Dankert
ReplyDeleteHe looked to have taken advice from someone on the dugout side
DeleteDefinitely just didn't see it, he's not looking there. AR maybe saw some light contact and 'smelled' a YC. This is what VAR is for
DeleteProof that even with big lead ref needs to be focused all the time.
ReplyDeleteClear 2nd YC missed for Chelsea player
ReplyDeleteHow CHE25 is still on the pitch is another level.
ReplyDeleteAnother 2nd YC missed, this time for Caicedo.
ReplyDeleteDare I say, Fifa deserve this performance. If you pick on politics and career, over form, tournament performance, and the best fit for the teams involved, then you deserve what you get. We've been seeing this style all tournament from Faghani, so why could anyone expect different today? Also, the players wouldn't act this way in the UCL, because they wouldn't get away with it
ReplyDeleteShould have been a UEFA referee, or Tello, given his style. Would have made so much more sense, but Collina had burned most of them in the knockouts already.
Delete90' clear tackle in revenge mode,I mean player is only focused to bring down Delap.
ReplyDeleteLazy uncontrolled disasterclass performance.
ReplyDeleteThe positive is no WC final next year...it is laughable some thought this was even a possibility
Also,Sanchez can waste as much time as he want.
ReplyDeleteThe best way to summarise, is we have seen what I call “A-League Faghani” rather than the referee we see at world cup’s where he looks like the best in the world. Foul detection has still been of a high level tonight, but horrendously inconsistent sanctioning throughout his tournament. Well done to AR2 Ash Beecham pick of the bunch
ReplyDeleteThe finale that FIFA so, so deserve.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. 100%
Delete+1.
Delete+2
Delete+3
DeleteAs for this tournament;
ReplyDeleteWe can say chaos started and ended with PSG .
Started with them and Kovacs.
Ended with them and Faghani.
Long ban for Enrique coming… PSG have to take responsibility for this behaviour. This is nothing to do with the referee
ReplyDeleteBtw,these were European teams that have civilized reputation...
ReplyDeletePSG don’t have a good reputation, they only behave when everything goes their way
DeleteWell,this season we did not see them like this cause everything was going their way😀
DeleteWell, Faghani create tonight new style of officiating- diplomatic style. Very good performance, invisible on the pitch, too much leniency in cards managment in my view, but at the end, I m satisfied what I saw from him.
ReplyDeleteFaghani wasnt at his top.... I think its a present to his career.
ReplyDeleteThe lack of taking decisions was very below par.
His condition wast that quite good.
The last tackle of Nuno Mendes on german television, that Nuno has Lucky with this referee
Was this a game from WC2014 ? Bussacaism way of refereeing.... If FIFA wants this officiating, then we should give up, really.
ReplyDeleteToo much cards maybe ,1 RC and 6 YC's is too much maybe.
DeleteTo think that number should have been way higher...
Enrique very aggressive towards Pedro after the game
ReplyDeleteAli reza faghani on of the best referees in the world its history bears this out
ReplyDeleteLet's just hope Mr. Al-Khelaifi doesn't break AR flags again :)
ReplyDeleteTo sum up: Despite Chelsea securing an early 3-0 lead, the match spiraled into chaos, culminating in a mass brawl. Faghani's lack of disciplinary courage allowed multiple second-yellow offenses to go unpunished. It became clear that he was reluctant to reduce Chelsea to 10 men — a failure of authority that contributed directly to the match's deterioration.
ReplyDeleteIn addition, time-wasting by Chelsea's goalkeeper was blatant and systematic. At every goal kick, the same ritual unfolded: slow retrieval, deliberate setup, and unnecessary repositioning of defenders. Yet, no warning or sanction was issued. This neglect not only violates the Laws of the Game (Law 12, delaying the restart) but also promotes negative tactical behavior.
I know FIFA have publicly praised the refereeing as "well-managed," the final was anything but. When the officials appear overwhelmed, inconsistent, or unwilling to apply the laws evenly, players exploit that weakness — and they did (especially the Chelsea). In my opinion: The professionalism of the players far outstripped the authority of the referee. The lack of preventative action or timely punishment fostered an atmosphere of indiscipline. Not every day we see a 3-0 match ending in such a hostile atmosphere (although the Dazn commentators tried to give it the positive angle of 'passion').
+1
Delete@Rasmus: perfect sum and considerations.
DeleteAli reza faghani the best referee in the world
ReplyDeleteCould you imagine Čeferin and any other national head of state in the middle of the photo that should celebrate the officials? (even if little to celebrate today)
ReplyDeleteAnd the whole stadium booing them while taking the photo... Not sure if towards officials of Infantino lol
DeleteI found a bit awkward not gonna lie
DeleteBut Trump and Infantino among the Chelsea players lifting the trophy is another level.
DeleteIMO, in the 2nd half, Faghani confirmed and further highlighted the weaknesses he displayed in the 1st half.
DeleteToo static, athletically struggling, he often found himself 25-30 meters from the action: too far away for modern football, but also too far to be able to see clearly, make effective decisions, and be credible. Unexpectedly, his performance was insufficient, both technically and in terms of discipline: and what happened at the end of the match is proof of this.
After this role, and considering his age, you could say that his experience as a FIFA referee is over tonight.
For me, score: 8,30
DeleteThe booing was most likely a combination of general disgust with Infantino and especially the president of the United States, along with some typical referee hatred and vilification of course.
DeleteI can’t help thinking this might have been Faghani’s ‘last dance’ in international refereeing. His whole appearance gave the impression of a referee not caring about guidelines, laws and opinions, and rather seemed a display of a referee having decided this was going to be his last act.
ReplyDeleteBut surely I could be completely off here.
This is almost a similar observation to Kovacs first game, except Kovacs actually gave cards…
DeleteIt’s the typical “playoff officiating” where everything except the most blatant and obvious fouls and misconduct are ignored. Ridiculous that there is a different standard because “we don’t want the referee to impact the outcome”
He doesn't get appointed a lot in our domestic league anymore in aus so he could be finishing completely maybe
DeleteIf that is the case, then AFC is f*cked for World Cup 2026, because everyone else is solidly worse than him.
DeleteThe competition is over, and the big mystery remains: what happened to the Libyan referee? Who knows, maybe one day the story will come to light.
ReplyDeleteI wouldn’t be so dramatic, surely an injury or personal issue.
DeleteAcceptable but slightly disappointing performance from Faghani, he wasn't at the top of his game in the way that we've seen over the years.
ReplyDeleteNotably, the biggest mistake of the game was failing to send off CHE7, who was already cautioned, after a foul which clearly stopped a promising attack in the 66th minute. I also think more discussion needs to be had of the 55th minute no-penalty decision, in which there is a clear and significant grab of the attacker's shirt by the PSG defender. I think this was a missed penalty. However, Faghani's position was excellent to sell the no-call, a theme which was repeated twice in the 59th minute on two other no-foul decisions.
In terms of misconduct, I think Faghani seemed to take a deliberate approach in the second half of not showing yellow cards unless absolutely necessary. There were some fouls late in the match where a YC would have been an appropriate decision (84', 87', 90') but Faghani just gave a small whistle. Either this meant he did not read the severity of these challenges, or he deliberately under-emphasized them to sell the lack of sanction. In the case of 87', the offender was already cautioned; in my view, this foul is borderline but does not rise to the level of a mandatory [second] caution.
Finally, I thought his management of the restarts at 82' (after the YC) and 90'+5' were weird. In the first case, the referee restarts very quickly to make the players leave the confrontation behind, but the Chelsea defenders were not expecting such a fast restart after a YC and were understandably surprised, it was not a very fair approach by Faghani in my view. Then at the end of the game, same idea, he restarted quickly to quell the altercation, but with just a few seconds left in the game, I think this approach was counterproductive, as it encouraged the players to settle their "unfinished business" after the match.
All told, not his best performance, but I am surprised to read some of the comments on here because it wasn't *that* bad, just "below average" for this level of match. What an achievement for Faghani near the end of a long and distinguished career
Delete"Acceptable performance" with, in your opinion, 2 crucial mistakes (not sending off a player and a missed penalty), 1 OFR and a bad management of the last 15 minutes ?
Well, the red card OFR I didn’t mention at all, because it’s almost impossible for a referee team to catch that live, and if they do, half the time it would be due to luck.
DeleteThe penalty I do think is a miss, but I will concede that I’ve also read opinions that it was a good decision. It may be supportable; if it is a 100% wrong decision (VAR intervention required), then my rating would drop accordingly.
The Faghani Dilemma: Merit, Politics, and Survival in Modern Refereeing
ReplyDeleteIf you're going to scrutinized Faghani for his recent performances, then I'll be the first to defend him, because many seem to have forgotten the most important variables that changed the old Faghani into what we saw in the final. Let's recap quickly. Back in 2018, we all agreed that Faghani deserved to officiate the final, not only based on his consistent performances but also because of broader context such as the Iran-Russia relationship at the time, which might have subtly influenced decision-makers. From 2022 to 2025, everything changed after the Al Marri incident, where Abdulla Al Marri, a young referee supported heavily by QFA due to political decisions, was pushed forward but eventually dropped by FIFA when it became clear he was neither a top-level referee nor a reliable VMO. Today, his place has been taken by Khamis Al Marri, who now sits among AFC’s top three VMOs alongside Shaun Evans and Fu Ming. In the 2023 AFC Asian Cup, Faghani again became a scapegoat after his decision in the Iraq vs Jordan match, and aside from Football Australia, no one came to defend him. Now ask yourself, given the current US-Iran relationship, would it have been possible for Faghani to officiate in a tournament hosted in the United States, let alone the final, if he still held an Iranian passport? Simply impossible, even if he was still performing at his 2018 level. But a new passport alone isn’t enough, because in today’s refereeing environment, you need backing from someone influential within the committee, even if the decisions sometimes seem illogical. This political aspect worked in Faghani’s favor, especially when considering controversial moments like the Inter Miami match, where many believe 2YC should have been issued. Had that decision gone differently and Inter Miami failed to qualify, Faghani might have faced the same fate as certain CAF referees who were quietly removed. I don’t think he was already designated as the final referee in advance like Kuipers was at Euro 2020, but his experience, came from "neutral countries" with strong passport and quite big FA, and his "maneuver" all contributed to his appointment. In the end, it’s not just about nepotism or favoritism, because when a referee still shows high-quality performances and knows when to compromise his idealism, that’s how survival works in this system and (unfortunately) that’s how the world works today.
Despite widespread criticism of Alireza Faghani’s officiating, FIFA’s decision to appoint him for the Club World Cup final is no coincidence. It’s a strategic move. In a match between PSG and Chelsea—two clubs with deep pockets and expected(!) unsportsmanlike reactions to defeat—experience counts more than form. This isn’t just any final; it’s a collision funded by Qatari and American money, with reputations and egos on the line. FIFA knew exactly what they were doing: they needed a referee who didn’t have eveything to lose, be turned into a scapegoat. Faghani, with his charisma and long résumé, fits that profile. Think again, a young up-and-comer like Abatti would’ve been an easy target in the aftermath of what promises to be an ugly and politically charged final. In this context, Faghani’s flaws may have been seen as less dangerous than his inexperience would be if he were someone else.
ReplyDelete