Luke Kreiner

Once you fully debunk the “technical justification,” the argument against Balogun’s reinstatement collapses to an irrational cling to normalcy: “This has never happened before, therefore it is unfair.” I can understand the gut reaction, but this is just as fundamentally illogical as the technical justification. If we concede the red card was undeserved, why is it a bad thing for FIFA to adapt and correct a wrong? Is it preferable to deliberately allow an unjustified suspension to be carried out? And why is it fundamentally unfair for this to be the first time they do it anyways? There is “legal” precedent; FIFA has the documented ability to review disciplinary measures and suspensions. Just because this scenario happened to play out at this stage of the tournament doesn’t change the fact that the red card was totally undeserved. If there were another immediate example in this tournament of an egregiously incorrect card being applied that was NOT corrected by FIFA, then there would be an issue. But as it stands, there is simply no rational argument for why this should not be the first. Of course, when you boil it down, the argument is not really about either the technical justification or the normalcy, but more that it’s just the USA that is the beneficiary. And I’m sorry to say, but if that is driving your sentiment, you need to get over yourself. The facts of the matter are clear: this was an unjustified red card that should have been corrected, regardless of the team it was applied to. FIFA absolutely made the right decision, and the game and tournament is better for it.