Are Argentina being treated favourably at World Cup?

Image source, Getty Images Image caption, Argentina have made the quarter-finals after winning 3-2 in the first two knockout rounds By Dale Johnson Football issues correspondent Published 8 minutes ago Argentina are throwing everything at the defence of their World Cup title - and they have needed to. After being expected to steamroller past Cape Verde and Egypt in the first two knockout rounds, La Albiceleste had to fight tooth and nail for 3-2 victories. But the win over Egypt came with an edge as the African nation asked Fifa to kick the officials in charge of their last-16 defeat out of the tournament. Egypt have alleged bias in favour of Argentina and favouritism towards their star player, Lionel Messi. After the game, coach Hossam Hassan said Egypt had been "treated unfairly" and "suffered injustice". Hassan went on to allege some kind of bias from Fifa. "Perhaps they wanted to keep the world champion in the competition. Perhaps they wanted Messi to stay in the running," he said. BBC Sport examines whether there is anything in the conspiracy theory that everything is being set up for Argentina to succeed. Is there any merit to Egypt's complaints? Image source, Getty Images Image caption, Egypt head coach Hossam Hassan was booked for protesting after Argentina's winner It is easy to understand why Egypt would feel so frustrated after Tuesday's 3-2 defeat. The Africans had led 2-0 with 11 minutes to play, on the brink of a historic first-ever quarter-final appearance. But it all went wrong as Argentina stormed back to turn the game on its head and score the winner in stoppage time. Egypt say there was something more suspect at play. They put their exit down to "serious refereeing mistakes" and "double standards" from French referee Francois Letexier and his team. The Pharaohs had a goal ruled out through a video assistant referee (VAR) intervention. They also claim Argentina's winner should have been disallowed, and a penalty awarded to them instead. Mostafa Zico's brilliant goal was chalked off after Marwan Attia was penalised for stepping on the foot of Lisandro Martinez at the start of the move. It was controversial, but they were leading 1-0 and did score a second goal nine minutes later. You cannot prove the game would have taken a different path had Zico's goal stood. Egypt believed there were two potential penalty claims in their favour before Enzo Fernandez headed home the clinching goal. Hamdi Fathy went to ground claiming he was held by Alexis Mac Allister, which was unclear on replays, while Mohamed Salah felt he was tripped by Julian Alvarez. There were some similarities between the Martinez and Salah situations, with foot-on-foot contact, but not enough to constitute a penalty. Egypt stood a better chance of getting the goal chalked off if Salah had been outside the area. The VAR would merely be judging a foul - as was the case with Martinez - rather than a penalty. Controversial? Absolutely. But it is hardly proof of a conspirac