FIFA's Punishments for Argentina: Unequal Treatment of Players and Federation
Henry Winter has cast a harsh light on FIFA’s handling of Argentina’s World Cup fallout, arguing that the governing body has gone hardest on the players while letting the federation escape with what he sees as a relatively soft landing.
The punishments arrived more than a month after Spain’s 1-0 extra-time win over Argentina in the World Cup final, and the numbers tell a stark story. Leandro Paredes received the biggest individual hit: a 10-match international ban and a $90,000 fine. Nahuel Molina was handed a seven-game suspension, also with a $90,000 fine.
For Winter, that contrast with the treatment of the Argentine Football Association is the crux of the issue.
‘Relative leniency’ for AFA
Writing on X, Winter summed up his view of FIFA’s verdict:
“Probably what we expected of FIFA's Argentina punishment for assorted World Cup excesses: relative leniency for the Argentinian FA and chunky bans for two scrap-happy individual players.”
The AFA was fined $321,000 for a series of disciplinary breaches. Those include the Falkland Islands banner displayed after the semi-final win over England, team misconduct, and discriminatory chants and gestures from sections of the Argentina support.
On top of the financial penalty, Argentina must play their next two home matches at 50% capacity. One of those reduced-capacity sanctions is suspended, as is $100,000 of the fine, pending a probationary period.
This is where the punishment starts to look lopsided. Argentina’s World Cup run reportedly brought in around $33 million. Set against that, a $321,000 fine barely dents the windfall.
The disciplinary net did not fall only on Paredes and Molina. Thiago Almada received a one-match ban, while Roberto Ayala was suspended for three games. On the Spanish side, Gavi picked up a one-match ban.
Paredes hits back at FIFA
Paredes has not taken his sanction in silence. He has accused FIFA of favouring Spain and of ignoring the trigger for the incident that led to his ban, focusing only on his response.
“I get 10 games ban and $90,000 after I defended myself,” he said. “It's obvious they didn't care to know what the guy said to me but are interested in how I reacted.”
He then pushed the argument further.
“If reverse was the case, everyone will say FIFA is helping Argentina but they are all mute now,” he added.
The AFA is preparing to fight. It intends to request the full written grounds of FIFA’s decisions, appeal to FIFA’s Appeals Committee and, if necessary, take the case to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
For now, the verdict stands. The real question, as Winter has framed it, is not whether FIFA acted, but whether the balance is right: does a $321,000 fine genuinely bite a federation that banked roughly $33 million from the same tournament, while two players carry the heaviest scars?
