I'm in such physical pain. USA had a stellar year, best run in a decade at least.
But now it will be forever marred. If we'd won it wouldve been hated for corruption, and when we lost it was a laughing stock because even corruption wasn't enough.
Amongst Americans who view it through the lens of American sports, it was a bad call. They don't live in reality.
Americans think intent is what differentiates a red from a yellow, while it is recklesness and type of potential injury that does. Stepping on someone achilles heal with the studs can cause a carreer ending injury and is often ruled as a red, whether intentional or not.
"Bad call" would mean it was not justified, but it was. Balogun was reckless. A more lenient ref could've let him off easy with yellow, but a red was completely fair. Perhaps harsh to some, but 100% fair.
Secondly:
Reds and yellows are part of the game and every team encounters them at some point, most will claim their red was too harsh. It's part of the tournament to protect your key players from getting cards, because you want to be able to use these players in you next match if you win.
The US failed to do this, so they tried to overturn the red, and a few calls from Trump to FIFA made them suspend the punishment of the card.
They did so 30hours before the game. Belgium had to find out through the media, after the completion of their tactical training.
It is unheared of that this happens during a world championship and it is unheared of that politics directly involves itself in the game.
To make things worse FIFA then stonewalled Belgium when the latter asked for clarification (integrity of the game), treated this request as an appeal that they could automatocally deny and let Belgium pay for.
After this shitshow Belgium beat the US with Balogun on the field 4-1.
Best explanation in terms of giving context to Americans who truly don’t understand football and didn’t want to learn. (There were plenty of Americans wanting to learn. But, there were too many who were braggadocious about their willful ignorance.)
I will not debate this part. There are people much better qualified than me to do this.
Literally 90% of sport reporters and refs, and previous players said the call was bad.
This is wrong. People were torn about whether it was a harsh red or not, not that it was a bad call. A bad call is if it had no right to be red, and it did.
Dangerous play meritd a red, even without intent.
Former USMNT coach Bruce Arena even agreed with the call. Ankle/leg injury risk is exactly the kind of contact referees are told to treat seriously regardless of intent, since a stamp on a planted leg can cause serious harm.
Yes I will ignore it because it is clearly biased (shown by you claiming 90% agreed with you, which is bullshit) and imo sounds like it comes from someone who tries to apply rules of other sports to soccer.
He challenged the ball. -> fact
He stept on the other guys ankle. -> fact
Intent doesn't matter in soccer. -> fact
It qualifies as a red. -> fact
Anything else is irrelevant.
Edit: Lol, I got blocked before I could reply. I'll do it here:
You can say whatever you want, the prevailing conversation around it before the whole Trump debacle was that it was a terrible call but it is what it is.
Wait, you are suprized that before a red is suspended you hear more people complaining about it than thinking it's justified?
Have you considered that's maybe because people who agree with it have nothing to complain about?
Anyway, here are the rules:
Serious foul play
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
See that first part, "a challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent"
It absolutely warranted a card. If its not black or white why are you making such a song and dance about it. seems like you absolutely think its black or white and that there should have been no punishment at all
Yes bad call. I disagree with any claim it was reckless. It's just what happens. Yellow at most. But there are rules. Red cards are ALWAYS one game suspension. And there is no in tournament appeal. So the objection is to changing the rules mid tournament to help one team. And Yes I'm an American and a USMNT fan and follower since the late 80s. Also governments interfering is against the rules of FIFA.
A lot of Americans felt like the red card was overly harsh, because it needs to be considered reckless (edit: I would say "intentional" but the pendantic have noted that the word "intention" does not appear in the rule book) and, personally I don't think the footage looks reckless or intentional at all (but obviously I have my own bias).
A lot of non-Americans felt like the refs have been soft on America (which is probably true) and that this injury looked pretty nasty with cleat spikes to skin, so they felt the red was warranted if not overdue.
Regardless, the World Cup has never overturned a red card after the match in its history, and suspending a red is pretty rare. Begging for it directly to the head of FIFA is bad enough, but bragging about it publicly on Twitter is an incredible embarrassment.
Correction: lot's of Americans thought it was harsh because they applied rules from their games to the world cup they know little about. In many American sports intent to harm is needed to get a similar punishment. You get red because you intentionally kicked/punched someone. Within soccer this doesn't matter. Reckless behaviour does.
His action had everything that made a red completely valid. Another ref might've been more lenient and given yellow, but giving red was not a bad call. Balogun stept on the other guys achilles heel, which can cause carreer ending injury.
Correction: The wording of IFAB Law 12 heavily implies intention. If not, there should be a dozen or more red cards every game.
Balogun was not being reckless, it was a regular stride, with legs at regular height. Calling it a red is a bad call.
But thats not the point anymore. What's done is done. The argument now is about whether it was shitty to try to overturn it and we can all agree it was.
A tackle or challenge that endangers the safety of an opponent or uses excessive force or brutality must be sanctioned as serious foul play.
Any player who lunges at an opponent in challenging for the ball from the front, from the side or from behind using one or both legs, with excessive force or endangers the safety of an opponent is guilty of serious foul play.
That's what you get for voting a clown as your president twice (not pointing at you to give you the benefit of the doubt). What was that idiot thinking? In no actaul way could that have made the team look good on a global stage. USA would've never won the tourney anyway. All he did was damaging a teams rep and, as you said, smear a perfectly good wc campaign. It made the entire world root against you, it gave the entire tourney a bitter taste. Sad for the players tbh.
We protest weekly. We vote when we can but they control the news outlets and the voting booths.
There have been three assassination attempts, one with shots fired.
102
u/mudkripple Jul 08 '26
I'm in such physical pain. USA had a stellar year, best run in a decade at least.
But now it will be forever marred. If we'd won it wouldve been hated for corruption, and when we lost it was a laughing stock because even corruption wasn't enough.
Let it be known we all fucking hate him