ZURICH (AP) — FIFA banned three Argentina players on Friday, including a 10-match suspension for midfielder Leandro Paredes, for striking Spain opponents moments after losing the World Cup final.
The ban for Paredes — who grabbed Spain’s Eric Garcia by the throat and pushed Gavi to the ground — ranks alongside the FIFA sanctions for Uruguay forward Luis Suarez in 2014 as among the most severe in World Cup history.
Argentina defender Nahuel Molina was handed a seven-game ban while Thiago Almada was given a one-game suspension. FIFA imposed fines of $90,000 on Paredes and Molina, and $30,000 for Almada.
The ban for Paredes is effectively a one-year expulsion from the Argentina team as the FIFA calendar for national team schedules includes 10 games through June 2027.
All of those games could be friendlies with no competitive games currently scheduled.
Spain’s Gavi also was banned for one game, which is a Nations League match against England at Wembley on Sept. 26.
An Argentina coach, Roberto Ayala, also got a three-game ban and $30,000 fine.
The Argentina soccer federation was fined $110,000 for a range of incidents during the World Cup including players carrying a political banner about the Falkland Islands after the semifinal win against England, and discriminatory chants by fans.
The federation also was ordered by FIFA to spend $100,000 on anti-racism projects. Argentina received $34 million in World Cup prize money from FIFA.
The Argentina federation can appeal the longer sanctions and fines to FIFA, and likely after at the Court of Arbitration for Sport.
In 2014, Suarez was banned from all soccer for four months, including for his new club Barcelona, and eight more competition games for Uruguay for biting Italy defender Giorgio Chiellini in a World Cup group-stage game in Brazil.
The on-field clashes at last month's final — which were charged by FIFA as assault cases — came after Argentina lost a testy final to Spain where it was mostly outplayed and barely created a scoring chance.
Spain forward Ferran Torres scored the only goal of the game in the second period of extra time, after Argentina midfielder Enzo Fernandez was sent off.
See AP’s full soccer coverage here
FILE - Argentina's Leandro Paredes (5) kicks at Spain's Eric Garcia (4) as assistant referee Tomaz Klancnik, of Slovenia, tries to break up a scuffle after the World Cup final soccer match between Spain and Argentina in East Rutherford, N.J., near New York, Sunday, July 19, 2026. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez, File)
FILE - Argentina's Leandro Paredes (5) knocks down Spain's Gavi (9) as Argentina coaches, right, scuffle with Spain's Eric García (4) after the World Cup final soccer match between Spain and Argentina in East Rutherford, N.J., near New York, Sunday, July 19, 2026. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez, File)
FILE - Argentina's Leandro Paredes (5) knocks down Spain's Gavi (9) during scuffle after the World Cup final soccer match between Spain and Argentina in East Rutherford, N.J., near New York, Sunday, July 19, 2026. (AP Photo/Julio Cortez, File)
LONDON (AP) — Prince Harry and six others, including Elton John, have been ordered to pay an initial 9.5 million pounds ($13 million) to the publisher of Britain’s Daily Mail newspaper following their failed invasion of privacy case.
In a judgment Friday, Justice Matthew Nicklin said in a written statement that the payment to Associated Newspapers Ltd. will have to be made by Aug. 28. The payment is at the upper end of expectations and marks a vindication for the journalists at the Daily Mail and a defeat for the losing claimants and their lawyers.
The claimants lost a High Court case in London last month during which they had alleged malpractice, such as the illegal hacking of phones, on the part of Associated Newspapers.
In excoriating comments accompanying his award, Nicklin said “several features” were important in his decision, including the “speculative” nature of the claims and the failure of the claimants to “voluntarily" withdraw serious allegations that could no longer be backed up.
"The conduct was unreasonable to a high degree," he said.
The publisher has said it incurred more than 34 million pounds during the case. Should it pursue the claimants for the remainder of the costs, then Harry and the six others will be liable for a further 25 million pounds or so by a later date.
The claimants are insured for around half that total.
Though the judge said the costs appeared “excessive," he said he would not impose a cap that would have limited the claimant's liabilities as it would have been “too broad brushed, would risk unfairness, and would be vulnerable to the charge that it was arbitrary.”
The other high-profile figures behind the case were Doreen Lawrence, the anti‑racism activist whose son Stephen was stabbed to death in 1993 as he waited for a bus; Elton John’s film producer husband David Furnish; actors Sadie Frost and Liz Hurley; and politician Simon Hughes. Lawrence’s costs are expected to be covered by the others.
Hughes, a former member of the centrist Liberal Democrats, said he was “disappointed and surprised” that Associated Newspapers’ recoverable costs were not limited.
None of the other claimants have yet commented on the judge's decision. They have until Oct. 2 to decide whether to appeal.
The publisher had strongly denied the claims made during the 11-week trial in London, which ended on July 7 when Nicklin said there had been a shortage of evidence to support the 97 claims and found a possibility that the reporting came from legitimate sources.
In a statement following the decision, Associated Newspapers said the judgment is a “devastating critique of an attempt to destroy a newspaper and the reputations of its journalists, editors and executives."
“The truth is that these outrageous claims should never have been brought," it said. "That they were pursued raises disturbing questions about the conduct of elements of the legal profession.”
The judgment comes two days after it was made public that Harry and his wife, Meghan Markle, are moving back to the U.K. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who are no longer working royals, decamped to California more than six years ago but will relocate back later this month to live in a nonroyal residence outside London.
Harry's defeat against Associated Newspapers brought an end to a trio of lawsuits accusing tabloid publishers of using unlawful tactics, such as phone hacking or hiring private detectives to dig up dirt on his life.
Harry won a judgment in 2023 that condemned the publishers of the Daily Mirror for “widespread and habitual” phone hacking. Last year, Rupert Murdoch’s flagship U.K. tabloid, The Sun, made an unprecedented apology for intruding on his life for years and agreed to pay substantial damages to settle his privacy invasion lawsuit.
Harry has said his litigation — in which he broke with royal family tradition to seek relief in the courts — was a primary source of his falling out with his father, King Charles III, and brother Prince William.
His grudge with the tabloids runs deep and his legal actions are part of his larger quest to reform the news media that he says damaged his relationships and made him “ paranoid beyond belief.”
He blames the press for the death of his mother, Princess Diana, who was killed in a car crash in 1997 while being pursued by paparazzi in Paris, and for attacks on his wife, Meghan, that led the couple to abandon royal life and move to the United States in 2020.
Britain's Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex, speaks at a roundtable about support for veterans, Wednesday, Aug. 19, 2026, in Washington. (AP Photo/Alex Brandon)
