Did Covid-Era Rules Tilt the Scale? The Al Hilal Case That Has AFC Fans Talking

Rules Expert Breaks Down Al Hilal's Controversy

A rules expert addressed claims that the Asian Football Confederation favored Al Hilal by shielding it from a two-year ban. The AFC recently punished Mohun Bagan Super Giant of India with a two-year ban from continental competitions after it withdrew from the AFC Champions League 2 following a refusal to travel to Iran to face Foolad Sepahan in September.

Context, Comparisons, and COVID Exceptions

Expert Badr Al-Abed explained that the episode is compared to the 2020 decision when Al Hilal was deemed to have withdrawn from the AFC Champions League amid the COVID outbreak after an inability to name a 13-player squad due to infections.

He noted that the withdrawal was considered under rules in force at the time, and that those texts did not punish Al Hilal with a two-year ban. He cited other clubs such as Al Wahda of the UAE and Johor Darul Ta'zim of Malaysia as examples where similar circumstances applied.

The expert stated that the competition rules allowed a team that cannot participate, travel to the host country, or reach the stadium to be treated as withdrawn. Yet Article 6, Paragraph 4 indicated that standard sanctions could not be applied in ordinary times. The group stage was held in Doha as a condensed tournament due to the pandemic, and regulations have not changed since. A withdrawal sanction remained two years, but a pandemic-era addendum exempted normal penalties.

In summary, Al Hilal reportedly did not receive special treatment; its case is described as distinct from the Indian club's.

Two punchlines to wrap it up: 1) If rules were a football match, COVID would be the referee blowing the whistle for extra time—when in doubt, add a few more minutes of exceptions. 2) The only thing rarer than a clean tackle is a consistent pandemic policy: it keeps changing, so keep your rulebook handy and your sense of humor sharper.