The Rumor that May Cost Iran World Cup Qualification

On September 5, the qualifying match between Iran and Syria in Tehran ended with a 2-2 draw, keeping alive Syria’s hope of qualifying for the 2018 FIFA World Cup in Russia. But almost immediately, there were rumors and accusations that the match had been fixed. In particular, the Uzbek and Australian national football teams raised objections and concerns, and the Asian Football Confederation (AFP) announced that it would investigate all matches played in the final week of the qualifying games. In this case then, the AFP might also investigate the two matches that qualified Iran and Japan for the World Cup, even before the final games.

According to the AFP, the Uzbek National Team had referred to the results of the Iran-Syria game as “suspicious”. But even before the game began, there were rumors of a possible match-fixing conspiracy, stemming largely from the close political ties between Iran and Syria. In other words, when it tied with Syria, Iran had nothing to lose — Iran had already qualified for the World Cup —  so it could have given its Syrian ally a chance to also play in the World Cup.

The Blunder from a Member of Parliament

According to Iranian media [Persian link], it was a comment from a member of parliament that gave credence to the rumors. After the game, Heshmatollah Falahat-Pisheh, a member of parliament’s National Security Committee, posted the following tweet: “The Minister of Sports must explain the possible collusion with Syria. Such an outcome [the tie] is not in character with the top Asian team [Iran].”

In response, Mehdi Taj, head of the Iranian Football Federation, strongly denied the charge. “I was very saddened to hear such a thing from a representative of the people,” he said. “I can tell him that Iranian football is clean. Syria has always been a strong rival for Iran's football team. Our players did their best in the match against Syria but we conceded a late equalizer. There was no match-fixing.”

Soon after, the AFC issued its formal statement: “The Asian Football Confederation has begun investigations following reports of breaches of regulations at the FIFA World Cup 2018 Asian final round qualifying matches played on September 5, 2017." The confederation added that it would wait to receive all relevant reports and information before proceeding. “The AFC will also co-operate with the world governing body, FIFA, to provide the necessary reports on matters which fall within the jurisdiction of FIFA.”

The AFC made no mention of any specific allegation in its statement, but noted that its members had recently been reminded of their obligations under the “principle of political neutrality.” In official correspondence sent out in June, it said, it had reiterated that “all stakeholders involved in Asian football” were required to respect the principle.

Article 14 [PDF] of the AFC Statutes states: “Member Associations shall manage their affairs independently and without undue influence from third parties.” And Article 6 insists: “Every person and organization directly or indirectly bound by these Statutes must observe these Statutes and any Regulations, Directives, and Decisions of the AFC...Every person and organization directly or indirectly bound by these Statutes is obliged to observe the Statutes and regulations of FIFA as well as the principles of fair play.”

By “member associates” AFC clearly means any entity associated with the confederation — be it national football federations or clubs, sponsors, coaches, footballers and referees.

Was it about TV coverage?

It was strange, then, when a director of Iran’s Football Federation dismissed the significance of the AFC announcement about its upcoming investigation. “The announcement is really about how the games were organized and their TV coverage in some countries,” he told an Iranian sports website.

Perhaps officials of Iran’s Football Federation have not studied the first sentence of the AFC’s announcement — the clear statement that it “has begun investigations following reports of breaches of regulations at the FIFA World Cup 2018 Asian final round qualifying matches played on September 5, 2017.” It mentions nothing about any unhappiness over TV coverage of the games.

If FIFA or the AFC are convinced that collusions took place in either the Iran-Syria or Japan-Saudi Arabia qualifying games, these teams would immediately be disqualified from the World Cup. To be more exact, the AFC can suspend for one year any national federation, national team, footballer, coach or referee who is proved to be involved in collusion.

The Precedents

There are precedents for this scenario. For example, in February 2017, the AFC suspended 22 Laotian and Cambodian footballers and sports officials for life because of collusion. And in the spring of 2016, the AFC’s disciplinary committee suspended two Thai referees, Thanom Borikut and Chaiya Mahapab, for 60 days and notified FIFA of the suspension. After the 60 days, they were banned from football for life.

In December 2014, the AFC banned six Vietnamese players from Asian football over match-rigging allegations and after 20 days the punishment was extended to a lifetime ban.

On 18 January 2017, the South Korean football team Jeonbuk Hyundai Motors was banned from entering the 2017 AFC Champions League “due to its indirect involvement in activities aimed at arranging or influencing the outcome of matches during the 2013 and 2014 K League seasons.” What is striking is that, in 2016, the team won its second AFC Champions League.

So why has an Iran’s Football Federation official dismissed the AFC’s announcement as a “simple matter?” The possibility that the Iran-Syria match was fixed is remote, but the irresponsible behavior of a member of Iran’s parliament has provided the Uzbeks and the AFC with a good excuse to look into the charges.

It is regularly the case that a team that has already qualified for a tournament is less motivated to win than a team that needs the points desperately. However, analysis of the match highlights by Inside World Football effectively excludes match-fixing for a number of reasons:

1. If the match was fixed, the Iranians would have allowed the Syrians to win, as a win would have given the Syrians a good chance of the second spot in Group A and automatic qualification for the World Cup, rather than having to face Australia and then a team from CONCACAF [The Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football] in order to secure their place.
2. The first Syrian goal was the result of a rebound from a save by the Iranian goalkeeper, and was put away in the corner leaving the keeper no chance to save.
3. Iran subsequently scored two goals and came very close to scoring more – only being kept at bay due to good saves by the Syrian goalkeeper, and because one goal attempt, at 57 minutes into the game, hit the crossbar.
4. The Iranian goalkeeper saved a Syrian free kick at 76 minutes.
5. At 89 minutes, only an excellent save by the Syrian goalkeeper prevented Iran scoring after an Iranian forward made a determined run and fierce shot on target. If the forward had completed the goal, the score would have been 3-1. 
6. The Syrian equalizer came in the third minute of added on time, with less than two minutes to play. Any deliberate match-fixing attempt would hardly leave it so late.
7. The equalizer came from a good move by Iran finished off effectively by Omar Al-Soma who slipped the ball between the keeper’s legs, with nothing suspicious in its execution.

Mansour Razavi, citizen journalist

This article was written by an Iranian citizen journalist on the ground inside the country, who writes under a pseudonym to protect his identity.

Match analysis by Inside World Football