Irvine backs Almirón’s red card, Socceroos face Paraguay

Socceroos midfielder Jackson Irvine says FIFA’s decision to send off Paraguay winger Miguel Almirón for covering his mouth when confronting opponents is a clear rule with fair warning. With Almirón suspended for Paraguay’s final Group D match, Australia and Pa
When Paraguay winger Miguel Almirón walked off after his red card against Turkey. the decision didn’t just change a match — it set the terms for a looming showdown. Socceroos midfielder Jackson Irvine says he has “no sympathy” for anyone trying to blur the line. backing FIFA’s choice to send players off for covering their mouths when they speak.
The tournament rule. introduced for this World Cup. is aimed at a trend of footballers concealing what they say during confrontations. Almirón became the first player sent off under that regulation after the incident against Turkey. and FIFA’s sanction means he will miss Paraguay’s team’s final Group D clash.
For Irvine, the only real issue is whether players had been warned. As a member of FIFPRO’s global player council, he said players were given fair notice — and that the rule is justified even if people don’t know exactly what was said.
“I know it’s going to be controversial in some ways because we don’t know the nature of what [the comment] was, but when you look at what’s happened in the past, especially around what happened with Vinícius Júnior, I think it takes everything out of the equation,” Irvine said.
The controversy he pointed to earlier this year involved Benfica’s Gianluca Prestianni. who made comments to Real Madrid’s Vinícius Júnior while covering his mouth with his shirt. In that Champions League clash. the referee did not send Prestianni off and the on-field behaviour could not be assessed through video evidence — but he was later banned for six matches for using homophobic language.
That is part of the background for why football’s lawmaking body moved when it did. The International Football Association Board approved the introduction of a red card for such conduct in April.
Irvine’s stance is blunt: Paraguay’s Almirón, he said, can have “no complaints.”
“If you’re saying something to someone that you don’t want to be seen, then I think it’s safe to say that if you can’t be seen saying it, then it shouldn’t be said,” he said. “For me, it’s a clear line on the rule, and we were all told about it, so it is what it is.”
The next question for Group D now is whether Paraguay can keep moving without the player who triggered the new rule’s spotlight. The teams meet at the San Francisco Bay Area Stadium on Thursday, which is Friday AEST. The match carries a direct stake in the standings: a win would be enough to leap toward second place. while a loss could force both teams to wait for a complicated set of results.
Paraguay enters the fixture with momentum after a 1-0 victory over Turkey. But to jump ahead into second place, they will need to defeat the Socceroos. Even third place could still be enough depending on outcomes across other groups — with the tournament set to allow one of the eight third-placed teams from across the 12 groups to progress.
There’s also a deeper history working in Australia’s storyline. Australia has never beaten a South American side at a World Cup, and Irvine is expecting Paraguay to be physical, skilful and difficult to predict.
He said the game is likely to look different from Australia’s earlier matches against Turkey and the USA — not just because of the matchup, but because Paraguay’s style can swing even when the scoreline seems settled.
“It’s going to be a totally different type of game,” Irvine said. “Paraguay players have incredible individual quality.”
He pointed to a late sequence against Turkey as an example of what Australia should expect. Irvine described how. with about five minutes to go. Paraguay won the ball back high up the pitch and created a chance near the corner. He said the cross went into the back stick with three players present. and Paraguay tried again to score even with 10 men while holding a 1-0 lead.
“Watching Paraguay against Turkey last night. there was a sequence towards the end of the game that sums up their style of football. ” Irvine said. “It was with about five minutes to go. and they had won the ball back high up the pitch. and they had a chance to go to the corner. The guy just whips the cross into the back stick with three guys. and they try and score again with 10 men and they’re 1-0 up. Expect the unexpected. I guess that’s probably the best way to put it.”.
For Australia, the red card issue becomes a different kind of reminder: games at this level are decided by small moments, and so are group-stage hopes.
Irvine said the Socceroos need to start better against Paraguay than they did against the USA. “The main thing that we have to get better from the first half is just being able to come into the duels and arrive – in the physical side of the game – a little bit better. and ride through those difficult moments. ” he said.
“We’re playing against top teams at the highest level, but they’re going to have moments where you’re going to have to defend and we’re going to have to suffer and you’ve got to find ways to get through that.”
MISRYOUM USA Jackson Irvine Socceroos Paraguay Miguel Almirón FIFA red card rule San Francisco Bay Area Stadium World Cup Group D Vinícius Júnior Gianluca Prestianni International Football Association Board
So basically if you cover your mouth you get a red?? that’s wild.
I’m not even sure I understand the rule, like how are they supposed to know what was said. Sounds like FIFA just needs headlines.
Jackson Irvine saying “no sympathy” is kinda cold ngl. Also they keep bringing up that Vini thing but wasn’t the ref supposed to call it? Video or not, refs should be consistent.
FIFA is tryna control everything. Next they’ll red card someone for whispering or wearing a scarf. And if the article says they gave fair warning, then why are people still arguing about what he even did? Half the time they don’t even review it right anyway, like that other match where the ref “couldn’t assess” it… so they did anyway? Make it make sense.