There will be no straight red cards for players covering their mouths in the Champions League this season, as UEFA firmly distances itself from FIFA’s latest controversial World Cup experiment.
A cold war is brewing at the very top of world football. Following a dramatic World Cup defined by FIFA’s increasingly radical refereeing directives, UEFA has officially drawn a line in the sand.
Ahead of the new campaign, European football’s governing body released a directive clarifying that the so-called "Vinicius Rule" - which sees players sent off for covering their mouths during a confrontation - will not be enforced in the Champions League, Europa League, or Conference League.
While FIFA dictates a mandatory red card for the action under certain conditions, UEFA officials have opted for a far more conservative approach. In Europe, covering your mouth will yield a yellow card at most, and only if referees deem the gesture a "deliberate attempt to conceal communication as an act of unsporting behaviour."
In short: UEFA is refusing to adopt the rule wholesale, treating it as standard dissent or gamesmanship rather than an expellable offence.
The Backstory: How We Got Here
Ironically, this entire saga was triggered by a UEFA-governed match. During a fiery clash between Real Madrid and Benfica, Gianluca Prestianni clashed with Vinicius Junior. The Argentine covered his mouth while launching a barrage of insults at the Brazilian winger. Vinicius later alleged he was racially abused and called a "monkey."
A subsequent UEFA disciplinary investigation confirmed the abuse, though it concluded the slur was homophobe rather than racist. Prestianni was hit with a heavy six-match ban.
While UEFA clearly has no intention of tolerating such vile behaviour, European chiefs argue that simply covering one's mouth is not enough to automatically imply guilt. As stated in their latest brief: "This, obviously, does not preclude any disciplinary investigations or proceedings that may follow as a result of or in connection with such behaviour." UEFA prefers to investigate the aftermath rather than hand referees the power to brandish instant red cards based on a gesture alone.
Infantino’s Brainchild
The "Vinicius Rule" was Gianni Infantino’s rapid-fire response to the incident. The clash occurred in February; by March 1st, the FIFA President was already publicly pushing for mandatory sendings-off.
Infantino’s logic was simple, if heavily criticised: "There must be a presumption that the player said something they shouldn't have, otherwise they wouldn't feel the need to hide their mouth. If you have nothing to hide, you don't cover your mouth when speaking. It's as simple as that."
The International Football Association Board (IFAB) fast-tracked the law in April, and the recent World Cup served as its global testing ground. It didn't take long for the drama to unfold.
Paraguay’s Miguel Almiron became the first high-profile victim of the new law during a tense 1-0 win over Turkey. After squaring up to a Turkish player with his hand over his mouth, the opposition complained, VAR intervened, and Almiron was shown a straight red.
Days later, Piero Hincapie suffered the same fate. The Ecuadorian defender covered his mouth while exchanging words with Mexico’s Santiago Gimenez during a 2-0 defeat in the Round of 16. The Mexican players alerted the official, a quick VAR review followed, and Hincapie was sent for an early shower.
The Bellingham Paradox
Yet, the tournament also exposed the massive grey areas in FIFA's new law, notably involving Vinicius’s Real Madrid teammate, Jude Bellingham. The England midfielder was spotted covering his mouth during a heated exchange with Jordan Ayew. However, Bellingham escaped punishment entirely because the referee decided the interaction lacked "confrontational intent."
Before the tournament, refereeing chief Pierluigi Collina attempted to clarify the nuance: "Players can cover their mouth with their hand or shirt if the conversation is friendly. But if the conversation is confrontational, covering the mouth means you might be doing something very wrong. In that case, the punishment can be a red card."
In reality, the system relies almost entirely on the opposition lodging an official complaint on the pitch. Ghana chose not to protest against Bellingham; Turkey and Mexico did against Almiron and Hincapie. It's a subjective loophole that UEFA is desperate to avoid.
A Deeper Institutional Rift
The refusal to adopt the "Vinicius Rule" is just the latest symptom of a growing ideological split between Nyon and Zurich.
UEFA has also rejected FIFA’s mandatory mid-game cooling breaks (maintaining they should only be used in extreme weather conditions) and refused to automatically dismiss players who walk off the pitch in protest.
But the animosity runs deeper than just refereeing guidelines. The two bodies recently clashed heavily over FIFA's handling of the Folarin Balogun red card controversy, with UEFA releasing a scathing statement calling a FIFA Disciplinary Committee decision "unprecedented, incomprehensible, and unjustified."
FIFA hit back sharply, stating that reviewing and suspending red cards is "standard disciplinary practice in top leagues" and accusing UEFA of overreacting.
According to renowned investigative insider Romain Molina, the relationship between the governing bodies has deteriorated to a toxic low. Reports suggest several high-ranking UEFA executives are actively plotting behind the scenes to replace Infantino, with insiders claiming "things cannot continue like this."
As the new European season kicks off, the divide on the pitch will be visible for all to see. In the eyes of FIFA, a covered mouth makes you a villain. In the eyes of UEFA, it makes you nothing more than a footballer trying to hide his tactics - or his frustration.
Published by Patrick Jane
14.07.2026