How A Red Card Sparked A Battle Between Trump, FIFA, and UEFA.

Folarin Balogun’s goal against Bosnia & Herzegovina felt like a turning point for the program. Not only were the USMNT in full control, but they looked like the dominant force in a bid to be taken seriously. In another universe, the buildup to the USMNT’s knockout rematch with Belgium would focus on 2012 and just how far the U.S. program has come since then, both in overall talent level and in the tactics used to exploit their strengths. 

Instead, Balogun became a lightning rod for other reasons. 

The USMNT were firmly in control until a pass into Balogun resulted in a battle for possession between the striker and Bosnian defender Tarik Muharemovic. Originally, no call was made as the ball flew out of play, but with both players prone on the floor, and medical staff making their way onto the pitch, VAR took a look at the play. Stu Holden originally remarked, “He’s going to be lucky he wasn’t given a yellow there,” while the replay honed in on the crucial moment – Balogun’s boot stamping on Muharemovic’s ankle. 

The Red card decision was already controversial, with critics opining that VAR should not have called Raphael Claus to the monitor. However, once it went to the monitor, the slowed-down footage always told a story of dangerous play worth a Red Card once intent and context were stripped away from the play. 

After the match, FIFA reiterated that there was no appeal process despite some admission that VAR should not have called the official to the monitor. 

That is where the real controversy steps in.

Until then, the issue was your bog-standard “what is the precedent?” conversation that has been a constant since the implementation of the video review system. However, FIFA made an about-face on the eve of the match, announcing the suspension of Balogun’s automatic one-match suspension, citing Article 27 – the same reasoning used to suspend Cristiano Ronaldo’s three-match ban ahead of the World Cup.

After the decision was announced, reports circulated that United States President Donald Trump personally made three phone calls to FIFA following the Red Card decision, of which Gianni Infantino claims had no basis on the disciplinary commission’s decision to suspend the suspension:

Infantino can claim impartiality, but it falls on deaf ears following all of the ways FIFA have tried to appease Trump throughout his second term.

The Royal Belgian Football Association admonished the process, stating their intent to appeal the decision before being informed by FIFA that the appeals window would last for “only a few hours.”

Full Statement:

“After learning through media reports of FIFA’s decision to lift the automatic suspension of player Balogun, the RBFA sent a letter to FIFA requesting a copy of the decision, an explanation of the process that had been followed, and setting out its position regarding the applicable regulations.

As its only response, FIFA sent a letter to the RBFA stating that it considered this correspondence to constitute an appeal, that a judge had been appointed, and that the RBFA had only a few hours to complete that appeal. No information whatsoever was provided by FIFA.

For an appeal to be admissible, FIFA’s own regulations state that the reasoned decision must first have been communicated to the appellant. While the RBFA was merely seeking legitimate explanations, FIFA itself created an appeal and immediately ensured that it would be declared inadmissible.

All of this occurred while FIFA simultaneously refused to respond to the RBFA’s legitimate requests.”

Where things stand?

• Folarin Balogun will be allowed to play even as the RBFA protests his involvement. 
• Trump is still taking credit for making the call, even as Infantino and FIFA deny that his private and public pressuring had any impact on the decision.
• UEFA, along with the FAs of Belgium, Norway, and Switzerland, have called out FIFA’s usage of Article 27, citing Red Card suspensions as ineligible for suspension via the clause. Hinting at a critical mass of displeasure towards Infantino’s leadership. 
• CAS may be involved, but there will be no decision before tonight’s kickoff. 

All the while, the USMNT has a game to play and a chance to move past the Round of 16 for the first time since advancing out of the group stage guaranteed a spot in the Semifinals. Mauricio Pochettino claimed the decision was a just result during Sunday’s press conference, a direct response to Belgium manager Rudi Garcia calling the decision a belated April Fools Day prank. 

Two things can be true:

The VAR process was flawed and out of line with how that exact play had been officiated throughout the tournament.

The President of the United States taking credit for influencing the decision is not just bad precedent for FIFA, it lays bare the play at the heart of Gianni Infantino’s desire to stay on good terms with the world’s foremost Autocrats. 

Once Infantino fielded the call, the focus lifted from the play on the pitch and lasered in on the naked corruption at the heart of Infantino’s drive to “grow the global game,” and it’s also why he’s been blind to the growing displeasure outside of his base. 

Can Infantino survive a war with UEFA? Does tonight’s outcome matter at all in that discussion?

As usual, the bigger story is beyond the game itself, but what if it didn’t have to be this way? 

If you like my work please subscribe. I'll be back with a recap of tonight's match as well as a larger NWSL newsletter this week.