July 5Jul 5 5 minutes ago, devpool said:The precedent was set with Ronaldo's suspension before the cup even began, and there is recourse according to FIFA.That was in qualifiers though and he still served a one game ban, they just rescinded the extended 3 match ban, which has happened before. Lifting the automatic one match ban, however, has never happened as far as I'm aware.
July 5Jul 5 29 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:lolwut? Who were they down besides Pogba?PogbaBenzemaKanteLucas HernandezKimpebeNkunkuAt least 4 starters and some key depth guys.
July 5Jul 5 On 7/4/2026 at 2:47 PM, DrPhilly said:Cause people don’t like FranceYeah it was a rhetorical question. I know it's because everybody hates France. But fffs, it's brilliant football these guys play, the highlight reel goals from anywhere, this isn't some Tom Brady/technician BS dynasty they are as exciting a team out there on top of dominating.
July 5Jul 5 Just now, dawkins4prez said:Yeah it was a rhetorical question. I know it's because everybody hates France. But fffs, it's brilliant football these guys play, the highlight reel goals from anywhere, this isn't some Tom Brady/technician BS dynasty they are as exciting a team out there on top of dominating.Well yeah they are excellent. As a place, France would be great if it didn't have so many French people. That's the basic sentiment over here.
July 5Jul 5 Just now, dawkins4prez said:PogbaBenzemaKanteLucas HernandezKimpebeNkunkuAt least 4 starters and some key depth guys.Eh. I'll give you Kante and Benzema (not sure how I forgot about him) but Giroud still played admirably at the 9 in his place. Hernandez is always hurt though and honestly not that great for France when he isn't. That's 3 players that could've helped, but they still wouldn't have creamed Argentina like you're implying. Those same 3 players were in the starting lineup only a year prior in the Euros knockout game against Switzerland and got bounced when it went to PKs. I'll repeat... To Switzerland.
July 5Jul 5 19 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:Well of course FIFA says so but they certainly aren't to be trusted given their history of fraud, etc. Others (neutrals who make a business covering the sport) who have reviewed the FIFA rules have said there is no recourse for a single game suspension. The Ronaldo suspension was reduced in the number of games and that possibililty is part of the FIFA rules. That's how I've understood it in any case. Happy to be wrong but one thing is certain and that is that we certainly can't trust whatever FIFA says.They referenced article 27 of the FDC27. SUSPENSION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF DISCIPLINARY MEASURES 1. The judicial body may decide to fully or partially suspend the implementation of a disciplinary measure. 2. By suspending the implementation of the sanction, the judicial body subjects the person sanctioned to a probationary period of one to four years. 3. If the person benefiting from a suspended sanction commits another infringement of a similar nature and gravity during the probationary period, the suspension shall be revoked by the judicial body and the sanction enforced without prejudice to any additional sanction imposed for the new infringement. 4. Disciplinary measures relating to match manipulation cannot be suspended.It's written right into their rules. Just because it hasn't been done before and it benefits the host nation doesn't make it wrong. People should be upset that they aren't doing it regularly.
July 5Jul 5 22 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:That was in qualifiers though and he still served a one game ban, they just rescinded the extended 3 match ban, which has happened before. Lifting the automatic one match ban, however, has never happened as far as I'm aware.I've never seen it happen either, but it's written in the FIFA Disciplinary Code that discipline can be suspended. It's not new, it's not made up, it should be implemented more often.
July 5Jul 5 5 minutes ago, devpool said:They referenced article 27 of the FDC27. SUSPENSION OF IMPLEMENTATION OF DISCIPLINARY MEASURES 1. The judicial body may decide to fully or partially suspend the implementation of a disciplinary measure. 2. By suspending the implementation of the sanction, the judicial body subjects the person sanctioned to a probationary period of one to four years. 3. If the person benefiting from a suspended sanction commits another infringement of a similar nature and gravity during the probationary period, the suspension shall be revoked by the judicial body and the sanction enforced without prejudice to any additional sanction imposed for the new infringement. 4. Disciplinary measures relating to match manipulation cannot be suspended.It's written right into their rules. Just because it hasn't been done before and it benefits the host nation doesn't make it wrong. People should be upset that they aren't doing it regularly.Not so fast. FIFA had already issued their decision. The use of the probation is only possible in the "initial decision" and not thereafter, i.e. the FIFA judicial body can't issue a new ruling. That's the way it has been interpreted previously. Perhaps the Ronaldo situation changed that as a new precedent.
July 5Jul 5 4 minutes ago, devpool said:I've never seen it happen either, but it's written in the FIFA Disciplinary Code that discipline can be suspended. It's not new, it's not made up, it should be implemented more often.The use of this article in rescinding a red card is definitely new but I get what you're saying. I'm just happy they came to their senses, but for an organization that's been thoroughly corrupt to their core, the optics are certain to raise eyebrows.
July 5Jul 5 So I think this is the situation. The way the rule has been interpreted and used is that FIFA had options it could use in issuing the initial ruling but once that ruling was formally in place there was no possibility to change it. Article 27 governs the initial ruling. The Ronaldo situation was the initial ruling and not a later change. So the new part which isn't specifically covered in the FDC is FIFA changing an initial ruling.
July 5Jul 5 Author Is there something I’m missing about why people were saying his red card couldn’t be reviewed?Every decision FIFA makes will be under scrutiny, and they have no one to blame for that but themselves considering the rampant corruption within the organization, but it seems pretty clear by this rule that they are allowed to review a suspension. And considering the VAR used slow motion replay for the ref, which it shouldn’t have, and the incidental contact which caused the foul in the first place, and this seems like a relatively innocuous decision.
July 5Jul 5 Author 11 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:Not so fast. FIFA had already issued their decision. The use of the probation is only possible in the "initial decision" and not thereafter, i.e. the FIFA judicial body can't issue a new ruling. That's the way it has been interpreted previously. Perhaps the Ronaldo situation changed that as a new precedent.So you’re saying that the use of a probation period can only be applied by the ref on the field at the time of the foul? Or the VAR replay?
July 5Jul 5 Just now, TEW said:So you’re saying that the use of a probation period can only be applied by the ref on the field at the time of the foul? Or the VAR replay?No, it can only be applied in the initial FIFA body formal ruling. That's the way it has been interpreted and used thus far using Article 27. The initial Ronaldo ruling made and announced by the FIFA body was for a 1 game suspension only with the other two reduced to a probation. In the Balogun case the FIFA body has gone back and changed a formal and announced FIFA body ruling and that possibility doesn't exist in the FIFA FDC rulings document.
July 5Jul 5 11 minutes ago, DrPhilly said:Not so fast. FIFA had already issued their decision. The use of the probation is only possible in the "initial decision" and not thereafter, i.e. the FIFA judicial body can't issue a new ruling. That's the way it has been interpreted previously. Perhaps the Ronaldo situation changed that as a new precedent.9 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:The use of this article in rescinding a red card is definitely new but I get what you're saying. I'm just happy they came to their senses, but for an organization that's been thoroughly corrupt to their core, the optics are certain to raise eyebrows.As I read it, this is the initial decision. There has been no appeal, because they couldn't appeal. They can't suspend the discipline during the match when the card was issued, so as it stands we are still in the "initial decision" window. All that was said after the match was that the decision could not be appealed, not that it couldn't be reviewed by FIFA.They fix this entire situation by adding a formal appeals process. Team can submit an appeal as soon as after the match, concurrently FIFA can review the event and determine if Article 27 needs to be invoked within 1-3 days of the incident, appeals to be resolved within 1 week.
July 5Jul 5 Author 1 hour ago, DrPhilly said:FIFA has never had any integrity. The call was horrible but once it was there and final they should have left it alone. There is no recourse in their rules for removing the suspension and now every single incident will be met with endless calls to be overturned afterward. They can add an appeal process ahead of the next tourney but for now this is both great for the US and also horsesheet for Belgium.
July 5Jul 5 5 minutes ago, devpool said:As I read it, this is the initial decision. There has been no appeal, because they couldn't appeal. They can't suspend the discipline during the match when the card was issued, so as it stands we are still in the "initial decision" window. All that was said after the match was that the decision could not be appealed, not that it couldn't be reviewed by FIFA.They fix this entire situation by adding a formal appeals process. Team can submit an appeal as soon as after the match, concurrently FIFA can review the event and determine if Article 27 needs to be invoked within 1-3 days of the incident, appeals to be resolved within 1 week.Don't think so. The teams were already informed and the decision was for the one game suspension. That's my understanding. Hope I'm wrong though.In any case, I agree 100% with you that they should include an appeals process.
July 5Jul 5 FIFA had initially imposed and communicated a standard one-match suspension on Folarin Balogun after his red card in the round-of-32 match, which—under normal FIFA disciplinary rules—is automatic and non-appealable. That original sanction meant both federations were preparing for him to miss the USA–Belgium round-of-16 match.This was the ChatGPT answer when I asked. So, both federations were formally told that Balogun would miss tomorrow's game, i.e. the FIFA body had made its initial ruling and had not decided to suspend the disciplinary one game suspension.
July 5Jul 5 It shouldn't take "corruption" to fix a failed decision to begin with. For all we know corruption caused the VAR review, wasn't the VAR official Venezuelan?Shouldn't have ever gone to VAR, and them they used slow motion and still frames during the review which should nullified the ruling from the start
July 5Jul 5 3 minutes ago, devpool said:It shouldn't take "corruption" to fix a failed decision to begin with. For all we know corruption caused the VAR review, wasn't the VAR official Venezuelan?Shouldn't have ever gone to VAR, and them they used slow motion and still frames during the review which should nullified the ruling from the startBro, he definitely caught him with his cleats. It was a clear yellow, no need for revisionist history now. Just be glad they reversed the red and he can play tomorrow.
Create an account or sign in to comment