The point of the suspension is to discourage deliberately violent actions when the current match isn't a major concern (i.e. late in games that aren't close, or when the result is largely immaterial). That obviously isn't the case here.
Balugun’s play certainly “endangered the safety of an opponent”, as the red card rule reads. Intent doesn’t matter as far as the rule goes. But the call on the field will always be subject to the referee’s judgement on the field. They are weighing a variety of factors, and intent plays into that judgment I think.
Bologun’s challenge was certainly red card “worthy”, but I think most people agree that the initial yellow card was the right call, especially since it wasn’t intentional. The ref saw it full speed, made his judgement, and that should have been the end of it.
VAR likely overstepped their mandate here asking for the replay review. I don’t think that was a “Clear and obvious error.” so they influenced the ref to upgrade to red. It’s especially upsetting when there are many other glaring examples of yellow cards in the same tournament that they did not send to review.
The level of scrutiny we place on foot position when determining offsides with VAR is an example of the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law. Offsides was not meant to catch players who were half a foot length beyond the last non-goalie defender.
I'm not sure VAR is the net-benefit we think it is.
This wouldn't be a story if FIFA decided internally that the card should be suspended, but that's not what happened, so here we are.
Gotta cash in that Peace Prize sometimes, I guess
> saying world soccer's governing body had "crossed a red line" and undermined the integrity of the game
Ah yes, the bastion of integrity defending truth and justice.
0: https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2021/feb/23/r...
>There have been 37 deaths among workers directly linked to construction of World Cup stadiums, of which 34 are classified as “non-work related” by the event’s organising committee.
And regarding the 6500 figure (for the 10 year period 2010-2020) :
>While death records are not categorised by occupation or place of work, it is likely many workers who have died were employed on these World Cup infrastructure projects,
The recent heatwave hitting Europe is said to have cause 1000 excess deaths in a week in France alone (again numbers are projections).
Maybe the traditional European teams should stop concentrating on personalities and start concentrating on team cohesion.
Look at how France was almost defeated by Paraguay until Mbappe was given a free kick, Netherlands defeated by Morocco (most of whose players would have played for France or NL if team selection wasn't so ossified), how Germany was stymied by Ecuador and Paraguay, and Portugal barely eked out a win against Croatia.
The Western European teams that have been doing well are those that have younger rosters and are concentrating on team cohesion and talent circulation (eg. Norway, Switzerland, England) instead of superstar player branding (eg. France, Portugal).
Either way, based on how Belgium played against Egypt and Iran, the US game would have been difficult for them even without Balogun.
If Western European and Cone (Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay are in the same boat) teams don't make national selections more meritocratic, the game will eventually shift to West Africa and MENA, especially given how much money is circulating in MENA football in preparation for the 2030 World Cup in Morocco and how diaspora players are increasingly choosing to play for their second citizenship instead.
[0] - https://www.theguardian.com/football/2025/nov/25/cristiano-r...
This is something I see so many people forgetting.
The net result of this decision is simply that the USA gets to play with their full squad and you have an actually interesting competition. The reason we as a world spend hundreds of millions of dollars to let athletes play a game for a living is pretty much exclusively for interesting competition. It serves no other socially useful purpose.
Embarrassing for the Belgians and the Europeans to respond any other way than: "we look forward to beating your best team, game on".
Look at the Paraguay game. When striking, Mbappe was trying to optimize for making goals on his own instead of coordinating with Kone or Rabiot.
There were multiple cases in the Paraguay match when Mbappe attempted a goal in a risky manner instead of passing to Kone or Rabiot who were in better positions to score.
Mbappe is basically concentrating on exclusively getting his own goals because he is on track to beat Messi's World Cup record and unlock a mess of sponsorships 4 years ahead of schedule.
Heck, all my Moroccan friends were rooting for a French win explicitly because they think they have a better shot at winning against France based on how France played against Paraguay.
The same lack of team cohesion has been a hanging albatross for Portugal, Germany, Brazil, and Netherlands as well.
The outcome was fair. That was a scandalous red card and a rule that exists to be sparingly used in situations like that was triggered. Hopefully it will keep being sparingly used but they should not hesitate to overturn unjust punishments that are clearly against the spirit of soccer.
Why are people so upset about it? Is Belgium afraid to face the full US squad? If Belgium wins, which is the most likely result, nobody will be able to say "the US could have won if it wasn't for that red card!"
He's their leading scorer.
His exclusion seemed kind of important to you a couple posts back. Along with the Secretary of the Treasury, and the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize recipient.
Political leaders intervening to give their countries an advantage is what makes it boring. Tilting the scales in favour of a country where you are trying to grow the sport may make financial sense in the short term but it makes for a more boring sport overall. Look at the the historically great teams like Brazil and Argentina, it's not like they have the success they do because FIFA decided that would be the most entertaining outcome. It's not wrestling.
With respect to you, I'm a lifelong football fan.
And read more carefully, the argument I am making is not that the competition ceases to be interesting because the US loses. The argument I am making is that the competition ceases to be interesting because the US doesn't get to field its best squad on account of a highly controversial on-field decision (itself downstream of a mis-application of VAR).
Let the chips fall where they may, should the USA lose after this, at least they got to make their best attempt at it. That's all I want as a spectator.
Well, that, and a President who interferes where he has no fucking business whatsoever and a governing body who kowtows to that same President.
This is just flat out cheating. But hey, fuck the rules, right? 'Cause our team got to compete.
It was the right outcome, but the wrong process.
With a little push from the President and Secretary of the Treasury.
Sorry, I can't give details - I only have a vague memory of it. Does anyone else recall?
I‘m actually not sure this statement is true. “The goal is ultimately entertainment” is a thought terminating cliché. What about sportsmanship, competition, beauty, experiencing a common cultural phenomena with the entire world, etc?
But even if this statement is true, FIFA needs to learn from the failure of Eurovision and see that people are not entertained by watching a rigged game. For competition to be fun, it has to be fair.
Hence: “which in practice will be arbitrary.”
It’s on FIFA to correct for that governance failure by making it less arbitrary via a more universal appeals process.
In any case, the rules were followed to the correct decision. It’s just that these rules as written are arbitrarily applied.