Balogun suspension lifted—will be eligible vs Belgium

Actually, I think that part of the problem is that too many see it as a "broadside" against Trump. They need to see it as a broadside against government officials getting involved. I do think that some...possibly many foreign countries do see it as the US govt getting involved...not specifically Trump. Of course, if FIFA was seen as incorruptible, we wouldn't have to worry about govt intervention....

 

I totally agree with you that we really don't know what happened, and that's why I am trying to give the players and the fed some time. But silence is approval in this situation so if people at USSF are uncomfortable with this then they need to put that out there, even if only on background. Because as of today the official position of US Soccer is this was all totally fine.

I am completely fine with the fed appealing the red card through proper channels even up to CAS if they really had a case. I personally think there is no case here, but hey have at it.

I guess where I disagree with you most is this is not just a badly handled PR situation. This was a terribly handled situation that is quite rightly earning the US team bad PR.[/quote][/QUOTE]

 

From a global perspective, what are the most memorable US matches of all time? IMO, #1 and #2 are the following:

1. England 1950 due to being a legendary upset.
2. Colombia 1994 due to the subsequent murder of Andres Escobar.

I'm not totally sure what #3 would be, because a lot of matches important to US fans and our opponents don't have as much resonance within the sport as a whole. But I see the Belgium 2026 match lingering as a #3 contender due to the political aspect.

 

Between Portugal and Germany? (both 2002)
If Confed cup had the same importance of WC, beating Spain in 2009 would be right up there.

 

I think the prior #3 would probably be Spain 2009 since the US shattered a lengthy streak of Spain, the dominant team of the era, which is the type of fact that comes up in broad histories of the sport. Even if ultimately from a global perspective the match wasn't as memorable as it could have been since it was the Confederations Cup.

I see the 2009 match as ahead of any match from 2002. Portugal is probably at the top of the matches in that tournament, but other upsets in the tournament get more airplay.

 

Spain definitely deserves to be right up there. Going into the world cup, Portugal was a favorite to win the WC and we were still nobodies. Both were huge upsets. Not sure which was more unexpected.

 

I agree that the death of thousands of people should be a bigger deal than whether a player is allowed to play in a game. And in terms of humanity that's true. But in terms of staying relevant this one is bigger because it impacted the game on the field. For many of us the game is sacred. FIFA, Concacaf, the different leagues and federations can mess with tickets, and the stadiums and who gets to host a tournament and we complain but come back because it's the game on the field that we love. So messing with the actual game on the field is a complete red line that won't be forgotten soon.

It's the precedent. It's the fact that someone with leverage and a close relationship with Infantino can just call up to get a suspended player to play for no other reason than "I didn't think it was a red card". There were already theories around Messi and Argentina but those are now on hyper drive. The argument, which I broadly supported, that FIFA is not going to risk their world cup over perceptions of favoritism are now completely blown up. If they are willing to favor the US so openly and blatantly then it's not crazy that they would do the same for Messi.

England's going through the same thing. The Quansah's two game ban is probably fair considering the tackle but England fans are now reasonably asking if they could have gotten it reversed if their government had a closer relationship with FIFA. And they aren't wrong.

So I would argue it's the whole tournament's that's been directly impacted not just one team.

 

Actually in Europe it is very much being seen within the wider context of Trump. The fact that he throws himself around like a bull in a China shop in the World Cup and in Nato are not seen as two distinctive issues but as different examples of the same issue.

Of course I agree FIFA is incredibly corrupt but as US fans that can't be our main complaint when it was our team trying to corrupt them. We have to call out our own side's role first before we can start sharing out the blame.

 

I think you may underestimate the blowback to US Soccer if they were to say anything. While you may think that is an immoral or cowardly stance, my personal experience in situations like these is that a lot of people who might stand up at cost to themselves will not when the blowout will be to the organization they are in.

Or maybe they approve. But let's not pretend Trump wouldn't make everyone's life a hell if they were to say something against him.

The best thing for US soccer is probably to be quiet and let it die. Picking an inherently political fight -- because there's no way to make it not one -- from an organization that is supposed to be about soccer is a bad idea practically.

I didn't say whether your second statement was right or wrong. Simply that it doesn't even need to be correct for there to be repercussions. It was a terrible PR mistake; the type that should get people fired.

 

No offense, but as a poster who spent a lot of this thread directly questioning others' morals, placing the "sanctity of the game" over slave labor and human lives is a choice.

While the precedent is terrible, the whining about calls and the such is not new. Stop acting like this isn't common conversation, and frankly most of the bitching is pretty annoying to me because those bitching about Messi were bitching about the LAST World Cup, and the English fans know damn well that was a fair red, and their FA even said they expected a two game ban.

Go read any Egyptian fans whose honest -- this deflection crap about rigged isn't even the first time the Egyptian coach has done this to deflect from his failings.

Blah, blah, blah, it's just internet bullshit.

FFS, one only needs to look at the last AFCON final to understand that while what went down was awful, no, this didn't open any can of worms. It's a can that was long open, and will be opened again. FFS, half the teams in the world are sponsored by betting sites.

This didn't create much of anything. The biggest thing here is the damage done to the US's reputation and branding coming out of this. No one trusted FIFA anyway.

If anything, I actually expect the uproar to end up with a clearer, more transparent process going forward. Which is not what anyone intended so they get no credit, but

 

I can see your argument here but it didn't have any effect on any outcome. Belgium won. It may or may not have contributed to our poor performance (distraction and all that), but that's like feeling sorry for an armed robber that accidently shoots himself in the foot.

Yes, I agree it has the potential to set a precedent that anybody with any sense of right/wrong would dread. Who wants a foreign leader, or wealthy individual etc., that has disproportional and ilegimate influence, intervening in a sporting event? We don't like it be we all pretty much agree that bad calls are part of the game, but bribery isn't accepted. (not saying this involved bribery...just an example).

 

I know everybody in this thread is still clutching white-knuckled at their Euro pearls, but I just want to say…

Good riddance to Belgium. Go be mediocre for a decade.

And I dearly hope England is out tomorrow too. What a bunch of self-righteous entitled snobs those guys are.

 

I guess I’m posting here because this is where a small percentage of the argument exists where we positively consider that FIFA is actually on our side going forward politically and organizationally.

I appreciate everyone’s legitimate alternate sensibilities…

If the tournament goes to 64 we are always seeded and we get to experiment with our lineup in the group stage.

I think that is in our favor in almost every aspect.

 

It’s nice be a neutral in the Embolo Embroglio. Love it when others have to wrestle with the outcome of tough VAR decisions. No doubt is the Swiss has won, they’d want him back and wouldn’t be shy about it.

 

The rule itself is harsh but did he not dive?

 

Embolo's dive was a clear as can be. It was a deserved yellow, just like Almirón's. I'm very glad that FIFA has used VAR for this purpose in this Cup.

 

I don't even think the rule is harsh. The harsh aspect of the call here is that two yellows equals a red, and a red means you are off with no replacement. If Embolo didn't have a prior yellow, would anyone call this harsh? No.

Soccer's issue here isn't the rule, or VAR rules.

It's that the differing types of punishment in soccer go from "barely a punishment at all" to "utterly devastating and gamechanging" in a heartbeat.

That's the root core of all the officiating problems. 99% of fouls don't even present a disadvantage to the team committing the foul. Reds and penalties are incredibly game changing.

A red card is the most damaging penalty in any big sport anywhere. It's not even close. Hockey will make you take a guy off the field, but you literally have to do something insane for it to be ten minutes, much less the rest of the game. Other sports will expel guys but allow a replacement.

Meanwhile, in soccer, you can get a red for a lot of things that aren't even dirty plays. The two yellows makes some sense if they are reckless plays, but no sense for dissent or dives or taking your shirt off or even borderline yellows.

But that's on soccer. There's zero attempt to make the punishment fit the crime.

There's very little in between and thus very little discretion for the ref to make the punishment fit the crime. If the ref does ignore something because it doesn't fit the crime, they get shit for bias. If they call it to the letter, they get shit for bias.

 

Yep. It was a cynical, unsporting flop, and I was glad he didn’t get away with it.

The fact that the only way to right the wrong with VAR is only if the ref cards the victim of the flop and then can only switch the card to the flopper (leaving no room for some judgment) is the area where complaint is understandable. But no sympathy from me.

 

VAR drives me nuts in that it isn't applied regularly to diving and/or feigning a foul. For example, in the England-Norway game a guy lifts his feet and goes down in the box, ref calls PK. VAR has ref review it and the PK is withdrawn. The guy doing to theatrics which fooled the ref should've gotten a yellow. Or Mbappe going down and lying on the ground at midfield for about 30 seconds holding his face. Replay clearly showed no contact to his face. Give that bum a yellow. Theatrics started to diminish the game years ago and the trend could be reversed with VAR. So tired of these strong athletes suddenly having the strength of a 95 year old bedridden man and falling over.

 

While I'd prefer more flopping get punished, I do think there's a reason for the "if there's any contact, there's no yellow."

If you don't draw a hard line, the judgement calls will eventually get to a really borderline place.

 

Rule of thumb that I've thought of over the years: If a player is physically able to roll over more than one-and-a-half times, then that's a sign that he isn't really hurt.

 

I think they are in a damned if they do damned if they don't. I agree if they speak out it may create an uproar domestically. That's why I would like to see the European based players take the lead. If Tillman makes a statement to the German media in German saying something along the lines of "Mistakes were made" or "in hindsight we should have handled it differently" it probably doesn't even register over here, but it starts to signal they recognize it's wrong. But so far it's seems like everyone is still saying the red card was bad so it was okay to do what they did. Okay that's their right, but I can't support them if that continues to be their position.

Apologies if it sounded like my argument was trying to say this was more important than slave labor and people returning to South Asia in coffins. It's not. I was just arguing that I think this will have a longer tail because it impacted the game on the field. In Qatar the issue didn't impact the sport going forward. I wish FA's including ours had taken a more principled stance. I would have supported the USSF boycotting the tournament but that was never going to happen with us hosting it the next time around.

This was different, not because it's worse. But because it has people wondering how the game could be impacted going forwards. Will this now be the norm? What if one of the big stars gets a red in the Semi's and their team still advances. Will FIFA step in again?

Yeah of course fans bitching about calls and conspiracy theories aren't new. What is new is clear evidence that there is something to those conspiracy theories. Coaches and fans bitch about the refs from youth through elite club football to the World Cup. Yep seen it all. You reference the AFCON which I watched live and while I thought the the penalty at the end was soft, and I was sympathetic to Senegal because of Sadio Mane it was crazy that they walked off the pitch. But the reason they did it was because there was a feeling across the tournament that the Moroccan FA was putting their finger on the scale. This was supercharged because of the Morocco's close relationship to Infantino. But those were just rumors and beliefs. What makes this case fundamentally different is these aren't rumors. It wasn't conspiracy theory that started on Nigerian Twitter, it is fact that the US government successfully got a red card suspension overturned. With no explanation. That's the difference. There have always been conspiracy theories around international football dating back to the earliest matches. The difference now is they are not theories but facts.
.

You and me both but I have no faith it's going to happen. At the moment it still seems like the players and the fed think what they did was appropriate because of the red card.

 

I don't think silence means they agree with the stance you've stated here. I think there's probably a variance of opinions, much like we have on here, but compounded by the fact that Balogun is their teammate, wondering what the opinion of US Soccer is, etc.

While I would respect someone speaking up, I am not going to condemn people who don't. It's not a situation I am in, and I think it's harder than people think.

In the end, the players are labor, and the people who should say something are Cone and the other members of management who run US Soccer.

However, I also think they as individuals, for as much as they might be scared personally, also feel the weight of possibly doing real damage to US Soccer.

And right now, both a legal, risk assessment and PR executive / advisor would tell them the best thing for US Soccer would be to shut up and let it pass.

The mistake has been made.

I think the idea of a boycott is a complex idea, and I'll be honest, I'm not a huge fan of constantly using something unifying as a stick. To me, things like the World Cup and the Olympics are important to uniting us, which is a big driver of long term good.

I think you honestly oversell the uniqueness here. I understand what you are saying, but it's not the first time we've had the issue, and it won't likely be the last. It's somewhat accepted the 1934 World Cup was rigged; that didn't end the world.

If the US had gone further, it'd be a bigger issue. If it truly sparks a bunch of government-driven decisions and this is the starting point of something terrible, it'd be a massive issue.

But we're out of the World Cup. The US might be the only country with the leverage to maybe get something done -- and even then, I don't actually know if he had any real influence.

But Infantino isn't going to rig something for the PM of Spain or Morocco. Or Saudi Arabia. He's already taken bribes from them. But there's simply no real upside for him there. Oh, we might see a red card rescinded a la Ronaldo, but we've already got that.

So even if there was real influence, there's just a good chance this is something of a one off that doesn't cause any slippery slope, at least not anymore than we are already on with FIFA corruption.

China is probably the one other country I could see it happening with. Maybe Putin in a different way.

 

If the USSF actually has evidence of bribery than yeah by all means show us. But they haven't done anything to other than broad claims. And so far FIFA has stood behind the refs and their decision. If there really was a case of bribery, or a gross mis use of VAR, or totally inaccurate implementation of the laws of the game, then there would be a case for this extraordinary decision. But because the decision is so extraordinary FIFA, and the USSF owe us an explanation. A week later and they still haven't provided it, and just today there is reporting that the decision was not taken by the entire independent panel but by just it's chairman. At this point we can safely say that this was what it looked like.