+0
Football's governing body has explained why up to 1,000 Dutch fans watched a World Cup tie wearing no trousers.
Around 1,000 fans arrived for the Ivory Coast tie in their traditional bright orange trousers - but bearing the logo and name of a Dutch brewery.

To protect the rights of the official beer they were denied entry, so the male fans promptly removed the trousers and watched the game in underpants.

Fifa said an attempt at an "ambush" publicity campaign was not allowed.

Fifteen major companies have paid up to $50m (£27m) each for the right to be official partners at this World Cup.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I can't take in the following of the above.

To protect the rights of the official beer they were denied entry. [ What is this?]

Fans came with traditional Dutch colours. The had logo and name of the Dutch brewery.

They were refused entry as they were wearing the logos. [ Is this correct?]
+0
I am not sure if this was about Heineken.

Anyway, the fans had logos which mentioned a brewery which wasn't one of the official sponsors, thus they were denied access (were not let in), in order not to prejudice the rights of the sponsoring beers.

And:
They were refused entry as they were wearing logos which didn't belong to the sponsors.
Comments  
They had the company symbol on their trousers which was not part of the official sponsors for the world cup.

dunno if that helped