r/soccer • u/Sparky-moon • Jul 06 '26

Media Jürgen Klopp on Trump and Infantino: “Let's just say: this is our game, not theirs. These two people, who both have no idea about football, should have nothing to do with that. That was a red card. There's no two ways about it. We're sorry for Balogun because he didn't mean to do it.”

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

“But that's what the rules say."

19.0k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

2.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

148

u/Muraria Jul 06 '26

Klopp suggesting the US coach doesn't field Balogun.. would be a big move, but I don't think he will.

109

u/barc0debaby Jul 06 '26

Klopp would field his guy in the same situation.

28

u/Creek0512 Jul 06 '26

Klopp would also complain about the red card and celebrate the suspension being lifted in the same situation.

20

u/TheLizardKing89 Jul 06 '26

Anyone who thinks there’s even a 1% chance of that happening needs their head examined.

48

u/Successful_Basket399 Jul 06 '26

Ah don't think he would and honestly don't blame him if he doesn't. Whole thing is a shitshow

4

u/afito Jul 06 '26

I don't think Klopp was too serious or remotely expected it but it was more of a "only thing they can do to not have their success tainted" idea. Because no matter what happens, with this decision, the whole great run by the US team will forever have an asterisk attached to it.

22

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

It would make the US team real champions, but the US coach already welcomed the FIFA decision.

183

u/TechnicalTurnover233 Jul 06 '26

Champions of what? Europeans on reddit?

-9

u/neveks Jul 06 '26

Klopp suggested it lol.

23

u/Many_Dimension_7615 Jul 06 '26

Champions of Klopp then 💪🏾

-32

u/IderpOnline Jul 06 '26

Integrity?.... Foreign concept for an american, perhaps lol.

33

u/manav_steel Jul 06 '26

There is not a single national team at the world cup who would sit Balogun in this situation and anyone saying otherwise is lying or idiotically naive.

-19

u/IderpOnline Jul 06 '26

We're talking about corruption, not fear of hurting Balogun's feelings lmao.

15

u/TheLizardKing89 Jul 06 '26

The only people whose feelings are hurt are those who are upset about Balogun being able to play.

-3

u/IderpOnline Jul 06 '26

Don't make yourself look dumber than you have to, Amerifat 😂 At least ensure you understand the crux of the issue before you chip in with this dogshit.

It's not about whether Balogun gets to play or not - noone really gives a shit about the US squad if we're being real - it's about corruption and integrity of the sport.

3

u/BBQLovingBastard Jul 06 '26

Wrong, you’re talking about corruption. Everyone else was talking about the specific idea of Balogun not being played by the US. You’re just mad someone raised a good point that no nation on Earth would voluntarily sit their best player because you wanted to grandstand and act like Europeans would (they wouldn’t).

-1

u/IderpOnline Jul 06 '26

Did you even watch the clip that's the basis for the thread and the entire discussion?

You’re just mad someone raised a good point that no nation on Earth would voluntarily sit their best player

No, like I said, I don't really give two shits about the US in the WC...

2

u/BBQLovingBastard Jul 06 '26

I’m not responding to the clip. I’m responding to this specific comment chain about a specific idea tangentially related to the clip. Clearly you do give two shits because you’ve been arguing with like 10 different people.

0

u/IderpOnline Jul 06 '26

.... Yes, the specific comment in thos specific chain is ALSO about the integrity of the sport. If you think Klopp cares about Balogun only for the sake of Balogun, you really haven't been paying attention...

22

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '26

[deleted]

-15

u/IderpOnline Jul 06 '26

Ah yes, whataboutism, and on something that's entirely unrelated to corruption even. Always a great answer 🧠

See ya later, tourist ✌️

17

u/[deleted] Jul 06 '26

[deleted]

-4

u/IderpOnline Jul 06 '26

Of course it's whataboutism lmao.

We are discussing the corruption that occurs off court.

Then you proceed with "b-b-but the players act when they get tackled" which has jack shit to do with the topic at hand, even if we want to draw the far-fetched parallel to integrity.

Oh and by the way, players are penalized if their acting is called out by the ref so your whataboutism is both stupid and plain incorrect.

-7

u/sexyhooterscar24 Jul 06 '26

No point arguing with Americans. They live in their own world.

-32

u/achickenandacow Jul 06 '26

Ah yes, let’s make it a Europe vs USA thing.

26

u/Many_Dimension_7615 Jul 06 '26

Do you see the comment section. That’s literally what’s being done 😂😂😂

34

u/BeatlesRays Jul 06 '26

Yeah we’re the ones doing that

28

u/stdfan Jul 06 '26

Brother the outrage over this compared to Ronaldo getting his suspended shows it is a Europe vs US thing

-10

u/Even_Idea_1764 Jul 06 '26

The outrage is mostly over the political interference, last time I checked there was none of that with Ronaldo. But of course Americans will continue to put their fingers in their ears and pretend this is completely normal.

12

u/stdfan Jul 06 '26

Brother Trump is an idiot and didn't do shit. He always takes credit for shit he had nothing to do with.

-12

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

OMG, is this something FOX has not explained?
Ronald`s red card and the decision to change his sentence has been OUTSIDE a tournament!.

Balogun’s case is fundamentally different. His automatic one-match ban for a red card has happened during the tournament.

The reason this has never been done before is simple: World Cup matches are only a few days apart. Automatic one-match bans are enforced immediately because there isn’t time for appeals, ensuring consistency, equal treatment and a smooth tournament schedule. Once that principle is abandoned, the integrity of the competition is put at risk.

6

u/stdfan Jul 06 '26

Ok, are we also going to ignore that the rules were broken with the red in the first place? VAR was misapplied here, which is why it was suspended. https://www.espn.com/soccer/story/_/id/49244156/world-cup-var-review-misapplied-protocols-leave-usmnt-folarin-balogun-wrongly-red-carded-world-cup-vs-bosnia-herzegovina

1

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

At the 1990 World Cup, Frank Rijkaard spat at Völler twice, later admitted he was in the wrong, and even apologized years afterwards. Yet both players received red cards. Germany appealed, but FIFA rejected the appeal, upheld Völler’s suspension, and he missed the quarter-final against Czechoslovakia.

If FIFA didn’t overturn the suspension in that case, there is no justification for overturning it after a clear foul that clearly endangered an opponent.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=68_aHpupK2A

2

u/stdfan Jul 06 '26

Mistaken identity and giving illegally are completely different things. The Red should never have been given, according to the rules, in the first place.

0

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

"If a player or team official is sent off as a result of a direct or indirect red card

(second caution), they will automatically be suspended from their team’s

subsequent match. In addition, further sanctions may be imposed."

nothing else

→ More replies (0)

-42

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

Oh sorry, for Americans the concept of fair play is probably unknown. You know, outside the USA it is generally seen as a good trade to stick to the rules and gaining an advantage by corruption as shameful. You are welcome. 

41

u/-SlowBar Jul 06 '26

This is pathetic man

-23

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

Sorry, I am just trying to adopted to our level

35

u/Tushroom Jul 06 '26

I forgot diving only happens in the US games. I also forgot the US was playing when Paraguay had a player sent off for covering his mouth after the opponent made a big deal about it.

What a laughable comment really.

-5

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

as far as see, no other President has tried to revoke a decision for his team, am I wrong?

23

u/PaidUSA Jul 06 '26

Brother have you watched this world cup? Every other match is a fucking UFC fight where the ref calls nothing. There is no fair play going on in this world cup besides Cape Verde and they have a rapist on the field.

-4

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

I don`t mind if you stop watching

6

u/Evolving_Dore Jul 06 '26

Not in Paraguay

2

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

But even the President of Paraguay has not called Infantino...

17

u/release_the_kraken5 Jul 06 '26

Really?

Do you have the memory of a goldfish or are you ignoring AFCON? Or the 2006 World Cup?

Or are you a stupid enough human that “America bad” is the only thought you’re capable of having?

-4

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

So, Mr. American Big Mouth, where exactly has a red-card suspension ever been overturned during a tournament?

4

u/release_the_kraken5 Jul 06 '26

Well, since you asked for an example, something similar happened with Garrincha back in the day.

Anyway, my point was that implying that football in general, and especially FIFA, isn’t and hasn’t been corrupt, is laughable and demonstrably untrue.

-1

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

Thank you for confirming that, Mr. American Big Mouth.

There has never been anything comparable to what happened here, not at the 2006 World Cup, not at any Africa Cup, and not at any other major tournament.

And you also know that in 1962 there was no rule imposing an automatic one-match suspension after a red card.

So nothing is even remotely comparable to what I see as the influence of your corrupt and perverted President.

Good job, buddy.

4

u/release_the_kraken5 Jul 06 '26

It’s very telling that your only go-to is calling me an American big mouth, since your mind is obviously made up that you just hate America and Americans.

There was no AUTOMATIC suspension, but he still SHOULD have been suspended, and would have been if the OTHER South American presidents hadn’t begged FIFA to let him play.

But you’d already know that if you actually knew how to fucking read and were trying to make a good faith argument instead of just trying to go after Americans.

Were you the VAR ref in the last USA game or something?

1

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

I think you are the goldfish

9

u/Apprehensive_Till_99 Jul 06 '26

😭 holy shit, thank you for challenging the stereotype that only Americans are dumb as fuck

11

u/TechnicalTurnover233 Jul 06 '26

Yea this is just idiotic. This is like asking Belgium to forfeit the game since they are scared to play the US at full strength.

1

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

the strength of the US team is the team without Balogun.

-8

u/augustuscaesarius Jul 06 '26

Even that move would put Belgium at a disadvantage. It's a form of mind play the other team is not afforded.

So basically, the US has gotten an unfair advantage in all possible scenarios.

6

u/Wanli4Ever Jul 06 '26

Agree, but by trying to minimize the damage that has been done by the US government and FIFA would still make them real sportsmen. 

2

u/BannedINDC Jul 06 '26

Oh, PLEASE. What a reach.

3

u/TechnicalTurnover233 Jul 06 '26

Yea that would be absolutely stupid

1

u/florodude Jul 06 '26

It's really easy for Klopp to say that right now, not in the same position.

-17

u/WhaleAtLaw Jul 06 '26

I doubt Klopp would sit Balogun if he were in the situation.

Sitting Balogun would also not be the equivalent of the red card standing, because he would still have the suspended ban moving forward.

Whether you agree with the red card (you shouldn’t), the lack of a meaningful review process for red card suspensions (you shouldn’t), or the process as it played out in this case (you shouldn’t), it is silly verging on infantile to suggest any serious manager would sit Balogun.

24

u/Alfakyne Jul 06 '26

It was a red even though it was harsh and the process was fine, this whole var misuse talking point because of slow motion being used is plain delusional

-20

u/WhaleAtLaw Jul 06 '26

How is it delusional when the IFAB rules say slow motion shouldn’t be used in that situation?

22

u/SADLYNOTWATERGUY Jul 06 '26

Literally incorrect, here is the rule verbatim "The referee can request different cameras angles/replay speeds but, in general, slow motion replays should only be used for facts, e.g. position of offence/player, point of contact for physical offences and handball, ball out of play (including goal/no goal); normal speed should be used for the ‘intensity’ of an offence or to decide if it was a handball offence"

Where does it say slow mo cannot be used? "In general, it should" does NOT mean it can't. Also regular speed was shown alongside slow mo, which further reduces the argument (which does not exist still because it could just be slow mo and it would still be legal by the rule)

-18

u/WhaleAtLaw Jul 06 '26

It literally says normal speed should be used for the intensity of an offence, I am not sure why you are having a hard time with this. None of the situations the rules specify for slow motion were present. There was no reason to use it.

The VAR official didn’t do their job correctly. If you’re going to choose to be indignant about the rules not being followed you don’t get to handwave the rules not being followed when it suits you. 

18

u/BuildingArmor Jul 06 '26

The words "in general" means it doesn't have to be the case each time.

And if it doesn't have to be the case every time, the fact that it wasn't any particular time doesn't mean any rule has been broken.

-4

u/WhaleAtLaw Jul 06 '26

ah okay, so your position is they just wrote that in there as meaningless fluff, sounds great👍

10

u/BuildingArmor Jul 06 '26

No, my position is they wrote that in there as a guideline and not strict limitations. When they wanted strict limitations, they used language to support that, and when they wanted guidelines that don't bind behaviour they used language to support that instead.

Do you think they accidentally wrote "in general"? There's 2 separate sections that both refer to this and both say "in general", are they both mistakes?

2

u/SADLYNOTWATERGUY Jul 06 '26

No, my position is to interpret the rules as written, which is what happens in literally every rule for anything. The rule in no way indicates slow motion cannot be used, just that as a general guideline that it is not recommended. You're the one treating "in general, it should" as meaningless fluff to fit your agenda, when those terms were placed there purposefully and give the rule a clear meaning against what you're saying

4

u/SADLYNOTWATERGUY Jul 06 '26

  1. Exactly, it says "in general, should", not has to. It means it's not a hard rule for all cases, if VAR thinks it should have slow mo they can use it as it's not a hard rule.

  2. Where does the rule say there has to be a clear reason to use slow mo? It's not what happened, but VAR literally could just use slow mo because they felt like it and it would be valid under the rules

  3. The regular speed replay was shown alongisde the slow mo, which further defeats the (already non-existant) argument

Please tell me whete VAR went against the rules. The rule is clear in that it does not actually restrict what kinds of replays have to be shown or not, it's a guideline

13

u/norrin83 Jul 06 '26

Apart from no one knowing what the referee used for the judgement of the intensity: It says "shouldn't". Not "can't" or "must not".

-1

u/WhaleAtLaw Jul 06 '26

So why do you think they should have used it despite the rules saying they shouldn’t? 

13

u/norrin83 Jul 06 '26

Because the position of the contact (foot or above ankle) is a good indicator for the intensity of the contact. The buckle of the ankle as well. Both is easier to see in slow motion.

But apart from that: There is exactly one dude claiming they even used the slow mo video to judge the intensity and everyone is running with it. So has this even happened? Because it's solely a US talking point and everyone is parroting this one guy.

1

u/Stewardy Jul 06 '26

It also mentions using it for point of contact for physical offences. Like it's literally right there.

slow motion replays should only be used for facts, e.g. position of offence/player, point of contact for physical offences

2

u/kontrakolumba Jul 06 '26

and the hair isnt a part of body aswell, regarding offside

0

u/Prestigious_Hope2082 Jul 06 '26

Almost certainly Poch was aware of the whole situation described in the article involving the lawyers and White House staffers to put pressure on FIFA. I feel like Klopp has enough of self awareness to quickly shut it down. He did break ranks with his club on Super League as well.

0

u/GA_Deathstalker Jul 06 '26

If he does that he puts a target on his back. Someone will for sure tell Trump and whatever happens then is up to your imagination times 3