Looking back from a Designer's view:

[treadasaurusrex]

The Spanish Civil War (Tactical Level) game by Compass Games is titled: A Las Barricadas! The game mechanics resemble those contained in the PG rules.

[PzIVF2]

"The differentiator in the game quite honestly would have to be morale and leadership. And I don't think you have to guess where the edge was in that regard."

Indeed.  The differential will have to be carefully developed to replicate historical performance.  But given the remarkably one-sided British performance, I expect the differences in morale and leadership must be profound.

"Although the only speakers I heard at the time were royal navy, there was not much talk about artillery or support weapons. Most discussions I heard at the time were of course about the exocet and air power even from them."

Re: artillery and support weapons.  As a USMA cadet in the early 80's, I was among those cadets (considering becoming Infantry officers) who followed the Falklands Campaign very closely, with the Dept. of Military Science maintaining a campaign map and frequent situation updates.*

That said, after the campaign was over, Dept. of Military Affairs secured a presentation by MAJ Kris Keeble (XO, 2 Para) and MAJ John Crosland (CDR, B Coy, 2 Para).  The focus was on military professionalism, leadership, and the infantry fight as experienced by 2 Para at Goose Green and Wireless Ridge (first and last battalion-level battles).  I cannot over-emphasize how useful such a talk was for those of us headed to combat arms.

And all that said, one of the significant points MAJ's Keeble and Crosland made was the crucial role the limited amount of fire support played in preparing and isolating the battlefield, and then suppressing the Argentine positions as the Para's went in.  2 Para had a half-battery of 105's in support at Goose Green, its own 81mm platoon (with limited ammo carried forward by its own men), and briefly - until its 4.5-in naval gun jammed, naval gunfire support.  

IIRC, at Wireless Ridge, 2 Para took casualties from its own artillery support as the attack went in.  Ultimately, it was still a section-on-section, infantry battle.

*Note: Support for the UK was not universal among the Cadet Corps.  We had a number of foreign cadets, many from Latin America.  So the Academy's position was purely from a current military affairs perspective, with no sides taken.

[treadasaurusrex]

Amen!

From the beginning of recorded human history, the quality of combat leadership has always been the key factor on any battlefield.

"Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat."
-- Sun Tzu, The Art of War

[JayTownsend]

The Falkland is very doable. LnL did a game called Heroes of the Falklands with 13 scenarios and added a supplement called A Feat of Arms, with 12 more scenarios. I used to own these, they were good but a lot of rules and unless you played this series all the time, you would have to go back and reread 70 pages of base rules and then another 12 pages of the module rules, so I sold them, as I knew I didn't have time for another system, especially this detailed but I enjoyed playing it once or twice. 25 scenarios with large counter the extra-large maps was fun. Maybe I shouldn't have sold it but if took up too much space.  

So yes, a modern PG on the Falklands could be done, if someone wanted to take the time to design it.

If AP wasn't so far behind, I might have tempted it myself, with an actual Argentine amphibious landing like LnL did.

Of course, with all this said, it is a different scale but you could still make it work.