DOHA, Qatar — Lionel Messi will line up for Argentina and Kylian Mbappé will be on the opposite side for France on Sunday in the World Cup final.
Messi has been there before, but lost in the 2014 final to Germany. Mbappé won the 2018 title after scoring a goal against Croatia.
However, neither will be able to win the gold trophy entirely on their own at Lusail Stadium.
Here is a look at some of the key players on both teams, and their coaches:
———
LIONEL MESSI
The 35-year-old Messi is the heart and soul of the Argentina team, the tournament’s co-leading scorer with five goals and tied for the most assists with three. Look for the Paris Saint-Germain forward to burst into creative life when he sees a chance to make something happen. A World Cup title would finally complete Messi’s elevation alongside Diego Maradona to icon status.
JULIAN ALVAREZ
Alvarez made it off the bench to replace Lautaro Martinez as the World Cup progressed and scored four goals in four starts with Argentina. The 22-year-old Machester City player is a powerful runner who created a perfect partnership with Messi in the 3-0 win over Croatia in the semifinals.
EMILIANO MARTINEZ
Martinez is an imposing 6-foot-4 goalkeeper with a personality to match his stature. “Dibu” would be favored if the final goes to a penalty shootout. The 30-year-old Aston Villa keeper made key saves in Argentina’s shootout win over the Netherlands in the quarterfinals and in last year’s Copa America semifinals.
NAHUEL MOLINA
Molina is an energetic fullback with the toughness expected of any Argentina defender. The 24-year-old Atletico Madrid defender also has attacking instincts. He received the no-look pass of the tournament from Messi to score against the Netherlands.
ENZO FERNANDEZ
Fernandez started the tournament as a substitute but was in the team to stay after scoring with his fast feet and a curling shot in Argentina’s victory over Mexico. The 21-year-old Benfica player anchors the center of midfield and will be trying to stop Antoine Griezmann’s forward forays.
LIONEL SCALONI
Scaloni was an assistant coach at the 2018 World Cup — when Argentina exited in the round of 16 against France – and is now an unheralded success in the top job. He brought a 35-game unbeaten run to Qatar that included ending a long wait for a Copa America last year. The 44-year-old Scaloni has succeeded in surrounding Messi with a midfield that lets him flourish.
———
KYLIAN MBAPPE
Mbappé is France’s fastest, most dynamic scoring threat on the field. The 23-year-old Paris Saint-Germain forward is tied with Messi with a World Cup-leading five goals. A standout game against Argentina will place him among the all-time greats.
ANTOINE GRIEZMANN
The 31-year-old Griezmann has been a revelation for France at this year’s World Cup. Once a goal-scoring winger, the Atletico Madrid forward has added relentless defensive protection to his creative craft. A duel could develop with Messi between the lines of Argentina’s attack.
HUGO LLORIS
The 35-year-old Tottenham goalkeeper is poised to become the first-ever captain of two World Cup-winning teams. A quiet-spoken leader by example, he now holds France’s all-time appearance record.
RAPHAEL VARANE
At his third World Cup, the 29-year-old Varane is a fixture in the center of a France defense that keeps changing because of injury and illness. The four-time Champions League winner at Real Madrid is back to near his elegant best after an injury scare in October.
AURELIEN TCHOUAMENI
Tchouaméni arrived on the world stage ahead of schedule in the midfield role Paul Pogba had for France four years ago. He matched Pogba’s shooting power with his goal against England. Learning at Real Madrid this season, after spurning Mbappé’s urging to go to PSG, should prepare the 22-year-old midfielder for facing Argentina.
DIDIER DESCHAMPS
In his 11th year as France coach, Deschamps can become only the second man to lead two World Cup-winning teams and the first since 1938. The 54-year-old Deschamps has integrated inexperienced players to replace injured veterans without losing any of his team’s typical calm assurance.
———
AP World Cup coverage: https://apnews.com/hub/world-cup and https://twitter.com/AP—Sports
DOHA, Qatar — It’s a huge day for goalkeepers with big reputations when defending champion France faces Poland in the round of 16 at the World Cup on Sunday.
Hugo Lloris will tie a national team record for Les Bleus four years after lifting the trophy as captain. Opposite number Wojciech Szczęsny is a penalty-saving, wise-cracking No. 1 who seems to be enjoying the tournament more than any other player.
Both get a stage to shine at Al Thumama Stadium trying to deny two of the most feared forwards in Qatar — Kylian Mbappé and two-time FIFA player of the year Robert Lewandowski.
“The key to stopping Mbappé? It’s me,” Szczęsny quipped when Poland’s place in the knockout bracket was confirmed.
Lloris will face Lewandowski in an international game for the first time when he matches France’s record of 142 appearances held by Lilian Thuram, the right back in the 1998 world champion team.
“It’s quite something and I’m very honored,” Lloris said Saturday. He was in the same France squad as Thuram as an uncapped 21-year-old in 2008 though was never played with him.
France coach Didier Deschamps, who played often with Thuram and was captain in the 1998 final in Paris, paid tribute to them.
“They have shown exemplary professionalism for the national team,” Deschamps said Saturday.
Lloris is a naturally quiet and courteous leader of this talented France team and he praised Szczęsny, who he previously faced at opposite ends of the north London rivalry between Tottenham and Arsenal.
“He’s playing a magnificent tournament,” Lloris said. “Poland deserve to be here at this stage and they’ve got a great goalkeeper as well.”
Szczęsny is the only goalkeeper this World Cup to have saved two spot kicks — one against Saudi Arabia and the second against Lionel Messi. Szczęsny himself conceded the latter one for brushing the Argentina great’s face with his glove when stretching for a cross. It was scoreless at the time in a game Argentina won 2-0 on Wednesday.
Szczęsny’s told the story of how he bet Messi during a lengthy video review that the penalty wouldn’t be awarded, only adding to his quirky time in Qatar.
The character of the 32-year-old Juventus goalkeeper, who is set to play his 70th game for Poland, is no surprise to long-time teammates.
“It’s not that Wojciech Szczęsny started to be such a great goalkeeper in this tournament — he’s been a great goalkeeper for years,” forward Arkadiusz Milik said Saturday through an interpreter. “It’s not a coincidence that in his career he played for wonderful clubs.”
Poland likely will need Szczęsny and Lewandowski to excel in its first knockout game at a World Cup since 1986. Since that 4-0 loss to Brazil, France won both its world titles and also was a beaten finalist.
Deschamps highlighted Lewandowski’s qualities as clever, technically gifted and knows how to use his body intelligently against defenders.
“He didn’t get a lot of the ball in the group stage, but with just one chance he can be very dangerous,” the France coach said.
Giving Poland some hope is that France lost in the round of 16 last year at the European Championship against Switzerland. Mbappé had the decisive penalty saved in a shootout after a 3-3 draw.
“We talked about that a lot,” said Lloris, who couldn’t stop any of the five Swiss spot kicks that night in Bucharest. “You have to be confident, but if a penalty is well taken, then the goalkeeper has no chance of stopping it.”
In Qatar, Szczęsny might be just the one to prove that wrong.
———
AP World Cup coverage: https://apnews.com/hub/world-cup and https://twitter.com/AP—Sports
LONDON — Rodrigo Bentancur struck twice late on as Tottenham came back from behind three times to beat Leeds on Saturday.
A thrilling 4-3 win in the Premier League may have seen Spurs manager Antonio Conte avoid uncomfortable questions heading into the World Cup — but it required a late rescue act from Bentancur.
The Uruguay midfielder leveled to make it 3-3 in the 81st minute before hitting the winner two minutes later.
It meant Rodrigo’s double and Crysencio Summerville’s opener for Leeds counted for nothing after Spurs’ fightback.
Conte has endured a difficult period as the World Cup has approached, with recent home losses for Tottenham to Liverpool and Newcastle, and exiting the League Cup in midweek at the hands of Nottingham Forest.
It didn’t look like getting any better for the Italian as Summerville put Leeds ahead in the 10th minute.
Tottenham equalized 15 minutes later when Ivan Perisic’s cross was punched by Illan Meslier to Harry Kane, who fired home his 13th goal of the season.
Rodrigo put Leeds ahead again two minutes before halftime when volleying Rasmus Kristensen’s header past Hugo Lloris.
Tottenham was level six minutes after the break.
Dejan Kulusevski got in behind the Leeds defense and found Kane, who saw a shot blocked by Kristensen. Ben Davies was first to follow up and, while Kristensen got in front of his effort, he could only divert the ball onto Meslier and it rolled over the line.
Rodrigo fired in his second in the 76th after controlling Marc Roca’s pass and drilling into the corner beyond Lloris to make it 3-2.
Spurs responded quickly with Bentancur chested down on the edge of the area and firing through a number of players into the back of the net.
The winner came when Kulusevski dribbled past Robin Koch and was able to draw Meslier out of his goal. He then squared for Bentancur to slot home his fifth goal of the campaign.
Leeds’ Tyler Adams was sent off for a second yellow card late on to round off a dramatic clash.
———
AP World Cup coverage: https://apnews.com/hub/world-cup
———
James Robson is at https://twitter.com/jamesalanrobson
What happened: In the 19th minute, Brighton & Hove Albion goalkeeper Robert Sanchez appeared to catch Erling Haaland as the striker attempted to take the ball around him. Referee Craig Pawson gave a goal kick.
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR review: Sanchez clearly catches Haaland, which makes this about that level of contact being enough to make the striker go to ground in the way he has.
Most would expect the VAR, Lee Mason, to award a penalty, but he chose not to because the ball was going out of play and he deemed there to be minimal contact.
The argument that the ball was going out doesn’t seem to hold water, as a foul remains a foul — although it can of course be used when deciding upon a yellow card, or a red card for denying an obvious goal-scoring opportunity. Minimal contact should only be a consideration when the challenge is shoulder to shoulder or a regular tackle. When a player catches an opponent with the sole of the boot (studs) leading, then it should result in a penalty kick.
VAR overturn: Penalty for Dunk foul on Silva
What happened: Bernardo Silva ran through the area in the 39th minute and clashed with Lewis Dunk. Pawson ignored the appeals.
VAR decision: Penalty, scored by Haaland.
VAR review: Play continued while the VAR reviewed the incident and came to a decision (2 minutes, 15 seconds from foul to the penalty being awarded), in line with the protocol. If the ball had gone out of play at any point in this period, Pawson wouldn’t have allowed play to restart. This happens in most games, so a match can carry on while a review takes place and not be interrupted if the VAR clears the incident.
One of the key things a VAR should look for is whether a player has initiated contact to draw the foul, which makes this VAR overturn confusing.
Mason felt it was more of a foul from Dunk, rather than contact initiated from Silva (no push was considered in the review.) It’s subjective whether you believe the Manchester City forward did position his leg or he was caught by Dunk, but for that very reason the VAR getting involved seems wrong.
Had Pawson given the penalty himself, then there is enough doubt for the VAR not to get involved to overturn too. It should have stayed with the on-pitch outcome. For the VAR to be the one to overrule the referee on such a subjective call doesn’t seem to fit with the Premier League’s overriding protocol for reviews. The referee will have the final decision at the monitor, but the VAR will usually show the evidence to support the overturn, rather than to have another look from several angles.
There are similarities with Bukayo Saka‘s booking for simulation against Southampton, although it was a harsh decision from referee Robert Jones to show the yellow card. Duje Caleta-Car made an attempt to tackle Saka outside the area, so the VAR cannot review, but the Arsenal forward placed his leg into the defender’s to initiate the contact.
The best decision in both cases would have been no action and for play to continue.
Possible foul: Wilson on Lloris before scoring
What happened: Newcastle United took the lead in the 31st minute when Tottenham Hotspur goalkeeper Hugo Lloris came out of his area and attempted to take a touch on the ball, then collided with Callum Wilson. The striker picked up the loose ball and lofted it over the Spurs defence to score (watch here.)
VAR decision: Goal stands.
VAR review: The VAR process took 2 minutes, 11 seconds because Stuart Attwell had three things to check: offside, the foul and handball by Wilson.
Referee Jarred Gillett decided it was a coming together between striker and goalkeeper, with Lloris having rushed out of his area to intercept the long ball over the top. There was no offside or handball.
The only evidence of a possible foul, rather than an accidental clash, was Wilson’s left arm coming out as he bumped into the Tottenham keeper, but it feels as though that would be searching for a reason to disallow the goal. Remember Jarrod Bowen on Chelsea goalkeeper Edouard Mendy?
The same applies to Haaland’s challenge on Adam Webster before his first goal on Saturday. The City striker showed great strength and some referees might have given a foul at the time, but the VAR shouldn’t be disallowing a goal in situations like this.
As discussed in last week’s VAR Review around the disallowed Man City goal at Liverpool, decisions are far better when they are keeping with the way a referee is managing the game. Gillett was allowing the play to flow, so to disallow the goal for what was a questionable foul situation wouldn’t fit.
This incident might also show us how the VAR process is being improved. There are similarities to the goal West Ham United‘s Maxwel Cornet had disallowed last month for the foul by Bowen; there was contact between attacking player and goalkeeper and the match referee deemed it not enough to rule out the goal, but it was cancelled through the VAR (who just so happened to be Gillett.) PGMOL then deemed it a mistake for the VAR to get involved.
Possible penalty: Handball by Royal
What happened: In the 51st minute, Joelinton attempted to head a cross back across the area, and the ball hit the arm of Emerson Royal.
VAR decision: No penalty.
VAR review: We discuss handball on a weekly basis, and there is a tendency for supporters to take individual aspects of certain decisions and apply them exclusively to other incidents rather than as an assessment that takes in all criteria.
For instance, while proximity could be the same on two handball decisions, that doesn’t mean arm position itself might not be the overriding consideration on one compared to the other.
All handball decisions are subjective, and each one has its own unique factors — how has a player made a challenge, ergo is he taking a risk with his arm in that situation? Would you expect a player to have his arm in that position? Has the ball come at the player from a short distance with no time to react? Has his arm moved towards the ball?
Royal had his arm in a position that would be expected when jumping to block the ball, even though it was out from the body. If the ball had hit his leading arm, or the arm it hit had been above shoulder level, there is a far greater chance it would have led to a penalty.
Compare this with two other incidents this month, both with Michael Oliver as referee. The first involves Arsenal defender Gabriel against Liverpool when no penalty was given due to proximity — although while Gabriel was using his arms as balance, a penalty through VAR might have been the better outcome.
Then there’s Aston Villa‘s Matty Cash against Fulham this past Thursday. Although proximity might be similar to with Gabriel, it’s the way Cash is making the challenge with arms away from his body that creates an obvious barrier to the cross and is high risk. There’s very little doubt the VAR would have advised a penalty if Oliver hadn’t awarded it, but the Gabriel incident is more subjective.
Possible offside: Kane when scoring
What happened: Tottenham pulled a goal back in the 54th minute through Harry Kane, but there was a possible offside to be reviewed (watch here.)
VAR decision: Goal stands.
VAR review: While Kane was onside from Clement Lenglet‘s initial flick on, the VAR review was about a possible touch from Davison Sanchez before the ball reached the England captain, which would have made him offside.
There was no definitive proof that the ball had touched Sanchez on the way through, so the VAR cannot intervene to disallow the goal.
Possible penalty overturn: McTominay foul on Broja
What happened: Chelsea were awarded a penalty in the 84th minute when Armando Broja was held by Scott McTominay as the ball came over on a corner routine. Referee Stuart Attwell pointed to the penalty spot.
VAR decision: Decision stands.
VAR review: This situation provides the perfect example of how VAR protocol, and the edict that the decision on the pitch carries most weight, will never give the game consistency of decision-making.
Attwell gave the penalty to Chelsea because the Manchester United midfielder had both of his hands around Broja’s body, enough to restrict the forward’s movement and his ability to challenge for the ball. But if the referee hadn’t seen it clearly, it’s unlikely to have been a situation in which the VAR, Michael Oliver, would have advised a penalty kick.
We can look back to Southampton vs. Arsenal, with Gabriel Jesus going to ground after holding from Caleta-Car, who initially got a touch on the ball. It’s far less prolonged than McTominay on Broja, and while Arsenal fans might believe the defender having both arms around Jesus should result in a penalty, it really is a decision that is not going to be given by the VAR. Again, the pitch decision carries the weight.
If you take each incident in isolation, most would say the Perraud foul was a clear penalty and Broja/Jesus were less certain, but the more obvious foul isn’t given.
The VAR’s role is purely to assess each individual incident based around the referee’s original decision rather than to take precedents.
VAR overturn: Gordon onside for goal
What happened: Everton thought they had scored their second goal in the 63rd minute through Anthony Gordon, but the flag went up for offside.
VAR decision: Goal awarded.
VAR review: Sometimes an assistant just gets it badly wrong. It doesn’t happen very often, but we do see situations when a player is a long way onside (or indeed offside by a large margin) and the flag goes up. It’s the exact reason why we have the delayed flag, as frustrating as that might be sometimes.
Gordon was well onside, and the VAR was quickly able to advise that his goal should stand.
VAR overturn: Luiz sent off for violent conduct against Mitrovic
What happened: In a game played Thursday, Douglas Luiz and Aleksandar Mitrovic squared up to each other off the ball in the 61st minute.
VAR decision: Red card, three-game suspension overturned by an independent regulatory commission.
VAR review: The three-man commission — usually made up of a chairman and two former players who are members of the Independent Football Panel — isn’t deciding whether the red card is right but judging only the suspension and whether that should be removed. It came as a huge surprise that Aston Villa won their appeal against Luiz’s suspension for wrongful dismissal.
The VAR, Paul Tierney, told referee Oliver he should visit the monitor to review a red card as a serious missed incident, meaning the officials hadn’t seen it. While both players went chest-to-chest against each other, Luiz appears to make contact with his head on Mitrovic’s (whatever you might think of the Fulham player’s reaction.)
PGMOL hasn’t yet received the written reasons behind the decision, but the only possible explanation is the panel either didn’t feel there was head-to-head contact or felt it was accidental due to the way they confronted each other. Either way, exonerating Luiz when there is no obvious evidence that the officials made a mistake was very unexpected.
It’s rare that a red-card appeal is won when there is evidence in support of the referee. Take the VAR dismissal of Everton midfielder Allan against Newcastle last season; it was a very harsh dismissal for serious foul play that Frank Lampard’s team appealed but ultimately unsuccessfully.
Information provided by the Premier League and PGMOL was used in this story.
