Vincent Öfner:
The story that FIFA or UEFA favor Messi feels older than Messi's career itself.
Of course, there were some contentious referee decisions in favor of the Argentinians, but unfortunately, it's often the case that top teams usually get a slight preference in doubtful situations. This isn't only true for Argentina and Messi.
Furthermore, refereeing performances at this World Cup so far have generally been anything but convincing. Only with absolute top teams is the outcry usually somewhat louder due to greater interest, especially in close matches.
The fact that top teams often prevail in these close matches is simply due to their higher class, which comes more and more to the fore as the game progresses.
And Argentina certainly had some luck, but as they always say about FC Bayern: "Always lucky is skill!"
Florian Gabriel:
I consider it completely the wrong approach to focus on the referee first after every match. Nowadays, every decision, no matter how small, is scrutinized and debated for days. In doing so, what it should actually be about often gets forgotten: football itself.
The best example was the match against Egypt. Instead of talking about Argentina's impressive comeback from 0-2 to 3-2, the discussion almost exclusively revolved around individual whistles. Of course, there have been contentious decisions at this World Cup too – but unfortunately, these have always been part of football. Someone will almost always feel disadvantaged after a close match.
Regarding the actual thesis: No, I don't believe that FIFA intentionally wants to get Lionel Messi or Argentina into the final. That top teams and big names sometimes enjoy a small bonus in doubtful cases is not a new phenomenon, and not one that exclusively concerns Argentina.
I view organizational decisions off the field much more critically – for example, when suspensions or red cards are suddenly revoked shortly before a match. That raises more questions than individual referee whistles during a game.
Thesis 2: With Switzerland's luck in the draw, Austria would also have made it to the World Cup quarter-finals.
Florian Gabriel:
I must (unfortunately) disagree with this thesis – at least in its absolute form. Even if Austria ultimately reached the "minimum goal" of the round of 32, the ÖFB team was not entirely convincing in any match.
The mandatory task against Jordan was accomplished with some difficulty, against Argentina they showed a decent performance in phases, but were too harmless offensively and struggled to cope with Messi's individual quality. The Algeria match was completely crazy, with a furious ending. Against Spain, they were eliminated without a whimper.
The absence of Christoph Baumgartner was felt in every single game. Ralf Rangnick tried many things, but no one could replace him. Therefore, I don't believe that Austria would have automatically marched into the quarter-finals on the "Switzerland path".
Anyone who only performs convincingly in phases on their own path cannot assume they would suddenly become a high-flyer on a supposedly easier tournament path.
A group victory like Switzerland's would certainly not have been a foregone conclusion for Austria. It probably would have come down to a duel with Canada for first place. Looking at their potential opponents in the round of 32, progressing would have been quite realistic. However, by the round of 16 at the latest, opponents like Morocco or Colombia would have awaited, against whom Austria would have once again reached its limits.
Therefore: Yes, Austria probably could have advanced one more round on the "Switzerland path". But the missed World Cup quarter-final was not due to the draw, but to their own performance.
Vincent Öfner:
I can only agree with my colleague. Of course, Austria was unlucky with the draw, especially considering Switzerland, but the ÖFB team couldn't convince in any match.
The absence of Baumgartner is one reason for this, but by and large, one can say that no one except Alex Schlager was able to perform at their maximum, let alone exceed it. So it would probably have been difficult on the Swiss path as well.
From an Austrian perspective, they at least had two absolute powerhouse opponents in Argentina and Spain, whom you want to compete against at a World Cup. If you can't create a good scoring chance against these opponents, then you have no business being in a World Cup quarter-final.
The example of Cape Verde also showed how one can perform against Spain and Argentina. The ÖFB team was far from the performance of the Africans.
Furthermore, Austria's knockout stage record in recent years, regardless of the opponent, is not exactly thrilling. Thus, the path to the quarter-finals would have been a long one either way.
Thesis 3: Due to the expansion, we've hardly had any real blockbuster clashes at this World Cup so far. Football fans really need to cross their fingers for France, Spain, England, and Argentina in the quarter-finals to see some.
Vincent Öfner:
It's true that there haven't been many blockbusters so far. Spain against Portugal was the only match that could be described as a classic blockbuster clash beforehand.
The reason there haven't been more top matches so far is simply also because former giants are no longer performing at their previous level. Otherwise, there would have already been Germany against France in the round of 16.
In the quarter-finals, France could have played against the Netherlands and England against Brazil, but the overall level has become higher.
And the expansion has proven that matches with the "smaller" teams are often more entertaining than the hundredth duel between two European top nations. Cape Verde against Argentina will certainly stick in my mind more than Spain against Portugal.
Therefore, I also hope that at least one underdog will prevail in the quarter-finals.
Florian Gabriel:
I can certainly agree with this thesis to some extent. I've also missed the really big clashes at this World Cup so far.
The "smaller" nations, in particular, have shown that they are long past being mere bystanders. Nevertheless, in the end, it's usually the top matches that define a World Cup.
People still remember France against Argentina in 2022 or numerous World Cup classics from the past years later – not just because of the quality, but also because of the history and the great personalities on the pitch.
That's why I wouldn't mind a semi-final between France and Spain, as well as England and Argentina. Surprises are part of football and make a tournament exciting.
However, as a fan, you eventually want to see the best teams in the world play against each other. After all, that's what a World Cup is for.
Thesis 4: Defense wins Championships? If that saying proves true, the World Cup title can only go through Spain.
Florian Gabriel:
Yes, Spain's defense has been impressive so far and is the only one in the entire tournament yet to concede a goal – but that alone does not make "La Furia Roja" the top favorite.
The big difference from the European Championship 2024 is the balance. Back then, Spain not only defended excellently but also developed the necessary attacking prowess. This is precisely what has been missing so far.
Lamine Yamal has not yet found his top form, Nico Williams has injury problems. Only Mikel Oyarzabal has been convincing, albeit only against rather smaller nations.
Additionally, with the exception of Portugal, Spain has not yet encountered a true offensive powerhouse. Their clean sheet record is impressive, but it will only become a true benchmark against the absolute top nations.
As stable as the defense currently appears: Over 90 or even 120 minutes, an offense of France's quality can hardly be completely neutralized.
Therefore, for me: Spain's defense makes "La Furia Roja" a title contender. But they will only become the top favorite again when they rediscover the balance from EURO 2024.
Vincent Öfner:
Of course, the balance isn't quite there yet in this tournament, but Spain has often also been unlucky in front of goal so far. And that the defense, of all things, is the core of the Spanish team probably comes as a surprise to most.
The central defense pairing of young Pau Cubarsi and veteran Aymeric Laporte, in particular, was often identified as a weakness in the run-up to the tournament. But 19-year-old Cubarsi is one of the most talented defenders in the world, and he is proving that at this World Cup.
Moreover, Rodri is once again showing that he is a Ballon d'Or winner and was once the best defensive midfielder in the world.
Of course, the Spaniards have so far lacked the attacking power they largely displayed at EURO 2024, but you can also win a World Cup without many goals, something "La Furia Roja" has already shown.
For their 2010 World Cup title, the team around Iniesta and Xavi scored just eight goals in seven games. They won every knockout match 1-0. With nine goals already at this tournament, the Iberians are almost an attacking powerhouse.
Portugal was the only big opponent so far, that's true, but it's no different for the other top teams. Of all the top nations still in the tournament, Spain certainly had the strongest opponent on paper with Portugal, and the team around CR7 was completely kept in check in the "Iberian Derby".
But for the really big success, the offense must, of course, step up again. Lamine Yamal slowly needs to find his usual form, but the 18-year-old has proven in his career so far that he can rise to the challenge. If that succeeds, anything is possible for Spain.
