For better or worse, the 2026 World Cup staged across North America will forever be associated by some with U.S. President Donald Trump.
As he was so keen to point out, it was during Trump’s first administration that the United States, Canada and Mexico secured hosting rights for a tournament which would be plagued by governmental controversy. Besides the prices, visas and travel bans, Trump also planted himself at the center of the Folarin Balogun red card scandal.
The President freely admitted that he intervened during an unprecedented protest which ultimately saw the U.S. men’s national team striker have his one-match ban suspended, allowing him to play in the round of 16 tie against Belgium. ESPN are among a number of outlets to have reported that the FIFA council is set to vote on a motion which will prohibit this action going forward.
The issue for many is that no amount of rewriting future rulebooks will change the tainted past.
Trump’s Role in Biggest Controversy of 2026 World Cup
When Balogun inadvertently landed on Tarik Muharemović’s ankle in the USMNT’s round of 32 win over Bosnia and Herzegovina, the issue could have been quashed in the bowls of Levi’s Stadium. A FIFA spokesperson informed assembled media waiting for Mauricio Pochettino’s press conference that there was no mechanism for the U.S. to appeal Balogun’s red card and he would thereby be forced to serve the automatic one-match suspension it brought.
Pochettino initially claimed that the team would appeal the decision before Peter Rutzler of The Times promptly informed him of the brief everyone had just received. The USMNT coach turned to his director of communications, Michael Kammarman, earned a stern nod, and swiftly accepted Balogun’s fate. But it would not end there.
Trump would freely admit that he subsequently “asked for a review” of the incident after reaching out to FIFA president Gianni Infantino. “I didn’t think it was a foul. I’m good at this stuff,” he shrugged. “I didn’t tell [Infantino] what to do. I can’t tell him what to do, but I don’t believe he made the decision.”
The decision was examined by FIFA’s disciplinary committee who agreed to suspend Balogun’s impending ban by citing Article 27. This little-known clause states: “The judicial body may decide to fully or partially suspend the implementation of a disciplinary measure.”
Infantino, a self-confessed ally of Trump who would have no jurisdiction to rule on Balogun’s suspension, was at pains to stress that “FIFA’s judicial bodies are independent” even if he admitted to “regularly” discussing World Cup matters with Trump.
“I read the decisions of the FIFA disciplinary committee when they are issued,” Infantino added. “Sometimes I am surprised by them. Sometimes I agree with them, and sometimes I disagree.” Many disagreed with this decision.
Why Rule Change Is Only the First Step
One of the chief concerns about Balogun’s suspended suspension is the vagaries involved. Besides citing Article 27, itself devoid of much description, there was little explanation as to why the U.S. striker was spared.
The England Football Association’s chair, Debbie Hewitt, has demanded a release of all documentation relating to the decision—as well as Infantino’s aborted World Cup private investment scheme. The Belgiun FA had previously seen a similar appeal overlooked.
This storm will come to a head in Thursday’s session of FIFA’s 37 council members, which will be chaired by Infantino. Balogun’s red card will just be one of many hot topics on the docket.
Add us as a preferred source on Google