In the United States’ round of 32 win over Bosnia and Herzegovina on Wednesday, striker Folarin Balogun was sent off with a red card after stepping on Bosnia and Herzegovina player Tarik Muharemović’s ankle.
That red-card decision by referee Rafael Claus — VAR reviewed Balogun’s challenge — dropped the USA to 10 men for the duration of the game and leaves the team without Balogun for the round of 16 match against Belgium. It was a controversial call that will keep one of the Stars and Stripes’ top goalscorers sidelined in a match with a quarterfinals berth on the line.
The big question is: Is there a red card appeal process that can retract Balogun’s one-game suspension? Simply, no.
FIFA regulations (Article 9, Section 6) states that: “No protests may be made about the referee’s decisions regarding facts connected with play. Such decisions are final and not subject to appeal, unless otherwise stipulated in the FIFA Disciplinary Code.”
Furthermore, FIFA regulations (Article 10, Section 6) adds: “If a player or team official is sent off as a result of a direct or indirect red card [second caution], they are going to robotically be suspended from their workforce’s subsequent match. As well as, additional sanctions could also be imposed.”
What selection does U.S. Soccer have, if any? It may attraction any resolution, however as a result of this was a subjective referee resolution — slightly than a factually incorrect one, like a pink card for contact when there clearly was none — FIFA is not going to think about it underneath its disciplinary code.
Nonetheless, if FIFA feels Balogun’s problem deserves greater than a one-game suspension and arms it down, then the U.S. may attraction that resolution.
Regardless, Balogun will sit out the spherical of 16 recreation in opposition to Belgium.
“The issue with that is that FIFA units such a excessive bar, particularly when it’s a VAR intervention. It’s not clearly [factually] improper by the referee,” FOX Sports activities analyst and former FIFA referee Mark Clattenburg stated on World Cup NOW.
“And, in the event that they deem [Balogun’s] problem ample, they’ll improve this card from a one-match to something they resolve.”
Was The Pink Card The Proper Name?
Clattenburg defined what occurred within the play from his perspective.
“After I watched this in actual pace, I believed it was a coming collectively of two gamers,” Clattenburg famous on World Cup NOW. “What you see is Balogun’s problem does catch his opponent on the again of the leg, and when [his foot] comes down, it catches [Muharemović’s] ankle. The issue is, the requirement of the pink card [means there] needs to be some pace, some drive and a few malice. This lacks that.”
He additional defined why he disagrees with Balogun’s pink card.
“However what it does have is,” Clattenburg continued, “it endangers the security of the opponent due to that foot-on-foot problem, which may’ve acted and ended with a damaged ankle. Nonetheless, for my part, this didn’t endanger the security of the opponent. Balogun doesn’t even search for the foul. It was an unintended problem, and this doesn’t attain the [requirements] of a pink card.”
Because of the nature of the method, the FIFA Disciplinary Committee will nonetheless overview the problem and resolve what comes subsequent for Balogun — particularly, greater than a one-match suspension.
For Clattenburg, Balogun’s problem didn’t appear worthy of a pink card, or additional penalties of a multi-game punishment.
“FIFA disciplinary will have a look at this problem [Thursday], and in the event that they deem this a harmful problem which may have endangered the security of this opponent, they’ll improve it,” Clattenburg stated. “I doubt it, for my part, as a result of I imagine that this was an accident, they usually imagine it was worthy of a pink card. And that’s the place they steer the pink card. It shouldn’t be upgraded.”
