Scotland are facing an uphill battle at the FIFA World Cup 2026 after falling 3-0 to Brazil — but former referee Darren Cann believes the scoreline could have been even more damaging.

Cann, who served as an assistant referee at the highest level, has pointed out that a goal from Vinicius Jr should have stood during the match, suggesting the Scottish side were fortunate not to find themselves in an even deeper hole.

A let-off Scotland may not deserve

According to Cann, the decision to rule out Vinicius Jr's effort was incorrect, and that Scotland benefited from a refereeing error that went in their favour. The goal, he argues, was perfectly legitimate and should have counted.

The incident has added to a broader conversation about the standard of officiating at the 2026 World Cup, with questions also being raised over decisions that affected England during the tournament.

Officiating under the microscope

Cann's assessment places the refereeing quality at this World Cup under serious scrutiny. Both Scotland and England have featured in contentious officiating moments — raising concerns among pundits and former officials alike about consistency and accuracy at the highest level of international football.

For Scotland, the issues compound what is already a difficult campaign. Trailing 3-0 to one of the tournament's heavyweights, the erroneous call offered little comfort in practical terms, even if it momentarily prevented a heavier defeat on the scoreboard.

The debate around refereeing standards — particularly with the use of VAR and other review tools at major tournaments — continues to intensify as mistakes at crucial moments draw widespread criticism from across the football world.