FIFA's decision to allow U.S. soccer player Folarin Balogun to play against Belgium after a red card suspension was met with significant criticism, particularly from Europe. However, the governing body's move was not unprecedented and was based on a specific rule within its disciplinary code.
Balogun received a red card during the U.S. team's win over Bosnia and Herzegovina, which typically results in an automatic one-match ban. The card was issued following a video assistant referee (VAR) review that determined Balogun had stepped on the ankle of an opposing player. U.S. coach Mauricio Pochettino and midfielder Weston McKennie both questioned the severity of the call, with McKennie stating that similar plays in the tournament had not resulted in cards.
Despite the initial ruling, FIFA utilized Article 27 of its disciplinary code, which permits a judicial body to "fully or partially suspend the implementation of a disciplinary measure." This allowed FIFA to suspend the enforcement of Balogun's automatic ban for a one-year probationary period. If Balogun receives another red card within this period, the suspended sanction can be enforced along with any additional penalties.
This approach has drawn sharp reactions, with Belgium's federation expressing "astonishment" and UEFA stating that FIFA had "crossed a red line." Former FIFA President Sepp Blatter commented that red cards are not overturned by political calls, but rather by rules and independent bodies. However, the article notes that FIFA's action was indeed based on an existing rule.
The precedent for such a decision was previously set with Cristiano Ronaldo. In 2025, Ronaldo received a red card during a World Cup qualifier against Ireland, which initially threatened his participation in future matches for Portugal. FIFA applied Article 27 to suspend part of his punishment, allowing him to play one match before the tournament while the remainder of the ban was delayed under probation.
While Balogun's red card occurred during the World Cup itself and Ronaldo's during qualifying, the core mechanism of suspending enforcement of a ban via a probationary period is similar. Other players, including Ecuador's Moises Caicedo and Argentina's Nicolas Otamendi, have also avoided carrying pending suspensions into major tournaments through different disciplinary processes, indicating flexibility within FIFA's system.
Historical precedents also exist for players not automatically missing subsequent matches after red cards. At the 1962 World Cup, Brazilian star Garrincha was sent off in a semifinal but was allowed to play in the final after a disciplinary panel reviewed the case and issued a warning. While soccer's rules have evolved significantly since then, this historical instance also demonstrates that a red card has not always automatically led to an immediate next-match suspension.
The involvement of U.S. President Donald Trump, who reportedly called FIFA President Gianni Infantino to discuss Balogun's red card, added a layer of controversy to the situation. Trump later praised FIFA for "doing what was right, and reversing a great injustice!" The optics of a head of state intervening in a disciplinary matter have been described as messy, but not illegal or unprecedented according to the report.
England coach Thomas Tuchel acknowledged that the initial decision regarding Balogun might not have warranted a red card. The U.S. team had already played a significant portion of their match against Bosnia and Herzegovina with 10 men due to the red card, a situation described by Pochettino as sufficient punishment for what he deemed an "unfair" decision.
FIFA's use of Article 27 is not new, and the concept of suspended disciplinary punishments has been applied previously. The article concludes that while the U.S. team received a significant advantage with Balogun's availability, the criticism from Europe should be directed accurately, acknowledging that FIFA's actions were based on established rules and procedures.
