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.

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 conspiracy in favour of Messi.

Take a look at the appointments for Thursday’s quarter-final between France and Morocco.

For the first time at this World Cup the whole on-field officiating team – referee, both assistants, fourth official and the reserve – are from the same country.

And that country is Argentina.

In Facundo Tello’s other two appointments, the fourth official and reserve were first from Saudi Arabia, and then Colombia.

The argument is that Argentina would want France to be knocked out. After all, they are the tournament favourites.

This is one of the biggest games of Tello’s career, his second World Cup quarter-final in successive tournaments. Such a high-profile referee is not going to act without the utmost integrity.

But perception is often just as important, and appointing Argentine officials against France in the quarter-finals is not a great look.

Messi avoids a red card and goes on to score five goals

Cast your minds back at the start of the tournament and a potential red card for Messi.

Messi did not even receive a booking for his challenge on Algeria captain Aissa Mandi.

Then, last week, occurred one of the most high-profile incidents of this World Cup.

Folarin Balogun was sent off on VAR review against Bosnia in similar circumstances. Both made contact on the opponent’s upper calf.

The United States are believed to have made this point when fighting to get Balogun’s ban removed.

If sent off, Messi would not have scored his two goals against Algeria, nor the double against Austria, as he would have been banned – unless Fifa decided to enact article 27 as it did with Balogun.

Messi would also have been unavailable for the final group game against Jordan when he again scored.

That takes away five of the eight goals he has scored at the tournament.

Was this special treatment of Messi?

How Infantino has made sure Messi plays in the past

Fifa president Gianni Infantino seems to like having Messi at his tournaments.

Take the inaugural Club World Cup last year, held in the United States.

There was a bit of a delay before it was confirmed which team from the host country would take part.

Surely it would be the 2025 champions? After all, this is a tournament for the best teams based on defined merit.

Close, but not quite.

Inter Miami won the 2024 MLS Supporters’ Shield, which is awarded to the team with the most points.

But it was LA Galaxy who went on to be crowned champions, winning the play-offs.

Yet Inter Miami were chosen for the Club World Cup.

That allowed Messi to play in the opening game, at Inter Miami’s Hard Rock Stadium, against Al Ahly.

The World Cup bracket favours Argentina

Fifa made a small but significant tweak to the World Cup draw in December.

The top four nations in the Fifa world ranking – France, Argentina, Spain and England – were drawn into separate quarters.

If those countries were to win their groups – which they did – they would not be able to meet until the semi-finals.

France and Spain are in one half and on course to meet in the semi-finals, with Argentina and England in the other.

The idea is it limits the chance of marquee ties early in the tournament.

But, depending on how the groups finish up, it also gives those countries a more favourable path.

In the first two knockout rounds, there were only two meetings of the world’s top 10 – Netherlands v Morocco and Spain v Portugal.

Argentina would appear to have been given the kindest route, even though they only just beat Cape Verde (67th in the world) and Egypt (29th) 3-2.

Next up in the quarter-finals it is Switzerland (19th).

England will not face one of the top 10 unless they come up against Argentina in the potential semi-final. They did have to beat Mexico (14th) in the Azteca.

Spain have beaten Portugal (5th) and now play Belgium (9th), while France meet Morocco (7th) in the quarters.

Argentina have had the best of this.

The quarter-finals come with a risk. Seventeen players are one booking from being ruled out of potential semi-final.

There is not so much jeopardy for Argentina, with only Gonzalo Montiel at risk of missing a last-four date with England or Norway.

England coach Thomas Tuchel has four players on a booking, and that includes key players Jude Bellingham and Declan Rice.

Norway, who have received the fewest bookings, have only Antonio Nusa on a yellow.

To assess this you need to take into account just how ‘dirty’ a team has been. Does the number of yellows match the number of fouls?

Argentina have received a caution every 19.7 fouls.

Only three teams – Czech Republic (37.0), Norway (24.0) and Tunisia (27.0) – have a higher yellow-to-fouls ratio.

Of the teams still active, England have been treated most harshly, with a yellow card every 7.7 fouls.

Argentina have committed more fouls than England, yet have received half as many cautions.

This could suggest Argentina are treated more favourably compared to the number of fouls they commit.

The penalties keep stacking up for Argentina

When Argentina won the World Cup in 2022 they set a new record in the process.

The five penalties they were awarded was the most any team had ever received in one tournament.

In 2026, they again lead the way with three spot-kicks – though Messi has missed two of them, against Austria and Egypt.

England and Switzerland have been awarded two, with Belgium, France and Norway on one. (BBC)

Update news