| ▲ | glimshe 4 hours ago |
| There is a rule to reverse the call on the books. Article 27 allows FIFA to replace the suspension for a probationary period. Of course the online mob didn't bother checking that. |
|
| ▲ | this_user 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| The rule does exist, but in all of World Cup history, it has been used once for this purpose over 50 years ago. During a tournament, it is understood that a red card means an automatic suspension for at least the next match. That is something that is universally applied. FIFA are clearly breaking with precedent here by using an obscure rule to lift the suspension of the host nation's player, which very much looks like favouritism. |
| |
| ▲ | charles_f 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Quite especially when the process seems to have been triggered by the head of state of that host nation | |
| ▲ | 5555624 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | FIFA also used the rule to allow Cristiano Ronaldo to play in this World Cup. Ronaldo got a red card in a World Cup qualifier, last November, for "violent conduct" (an elbow). It would have kept him out of the opening match for Portugal in this World Cup. He was issued a suspended suspension, under Article 27, allowing him to play. | | | |
| ▲ | glimshe 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | So what? It has now been used twice. I challenge anyone who's a soccer fan to look at the play that led to the red card and say "Yeah, that deserved a red card" with a straight face. 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!" | | |
| ▲ | rjrjrjrj 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Doesn't seem fair that Belgium has to alter their game plan the day before the match because FIFA dropped a totally unexpected decision 4 days after unequivocally stating there was no appeal process for the red card suspension. | | |
| ▲ | an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | [deleted] | |
| ▲ | thunky an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Its not fair that US has to bench their leading scorer due to a mistake either. So there's no way to please both sides. But beating someone with one hand tied behind their back should not be preferable. | |
| ▲ | glimshe 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Gee, we're not talking about Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo here... What kind of super secret, complex scheme was Belgium creating for Balogun? | | |
| ▲ | rjrjrjrj 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > Gee, we're not talking about Messi or Cristiano Ronaldo here 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. | | |
| ▲ | glimshe an hour ago | parent [-] | | It's not about being important, simply fair. I'm also not saying he makes no difference. I'm just saying he's not good enough to deserve some complex plan from Belgium. A small tweak on their plan and they will be good to go. He's a good player but no superstar. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | CodingJeebus 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| I understand the anger and I read the article, which mentions that. The issue isn't the rule, it's that a head of state (and not just a head of state, a head of the largest host state) allegedly called FIFA and asked them to intervene. 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. |
