By – Fortune Madondo
AUTHOR BIO
Fortune Madondo is a Zimbabwean Pan-Africanist writer, political analyst and a decolonial thinker. His work is characterized by staunch, unapologetic, defiant, Pan-Africanist and anti-imperialist stance, often addressing issues of neocolonialism and the need for African self-determination. His writing champions global South solidarity, regularly critiquing global powers hegemony and resource exploitation in Africa.His work is driven by his core Pan-Africanist framework: African sovereignty, anti-paternalism, African geopolitics; in all this, he advocates for socio-economic justice. He is a youth empowerment advocate, organiser, activist and a founder of a youth organization.
MANIPULATION OF THE BEAUTIFUL GAME
“As Trump Card Invalidates FIFA Red Card”
Introduction
When the world saw a shocking 10 minute interruption of the AFCON 2025-26 Cup final featuring (Morocco vs Senegal) after a disputed penalty, the football world thought they had seen it all, alas , FIFA along a string of other controversial calls hit a new low in the 2026 World Cup soccer show, controversially suspending a suspension of United States of America (US) player striker.
The Phone Call
According to New York Times, President Donald Trump phoned the International Federation of Football Association (FIFA) Gianni Infantino. The reason, FIFA to have a look at the red card awarded to Balogun.Trump himself confirmed phoning Infantino and when the red card was removed, Trump wrote on his Truth Social
“Thank you FIFA for doing what was right, and reversing a great injustice”
The Row
A major row erupted in world football after the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA) and other football experts and fans alike accused FIFA of “crossing a red line” by suspending the automatic one-match ban handed to US striker Folarin Balogun during the 2026 World Cup against Bosnia Herzegovina. Under FIFA disciplinary code Balogun had been set to miss the US’ Round of 16 clash with Belgium after receiving a straight red card. Under FIFA rules, a straight red card carries an automatic one-game suspension. However, FIFA’s disciplinary committee suspended the ban for a year, allowing him to play. This was a controversial decision made even more suspicious and eye brow raising following reports that the United States of America (US) President Donald Trump personally phoned and urged FIFA President Gianni Infantino to review the punishment.
The Book Of FIFA Laws
Article 66.4: FIFA Disciplinary Code
Article 66.4 of FIFA law clearly provides that a red card (sending-off) automatically results in a suspension for the team’s next match, as has been the case for all previous red cards issued during this FIFA World Cup.
Article 27: Suspending the Suspension
Article 27 allows FIFA to suspend the implementation of a disciplinary sanction. The article allows FIFA’s judicial bodies to suspend the implementation of all or part of a disciplinary action. According to FIFA, this is the article that FIFA invoked to suspend Folarin Balogun’s automatic red-card ban. So this “article 27 of the FIFA disciplinary code” allowed the suspension to be “suspended for a probationary period of one year”. And according to FIFA president this is the piece of law which made FIFA to procedurally and legally remove suspension of Balogun red allowed him to play against Belgium in spite of seeing red from previous match against Bosnia- Herzegovina. So, all was done within the confines of FIFA laws and regulations, nothing outside the legal regulatory modalities.
Article 14: Non- political interference.
FIFA’s statutes are crystal clear about political interference. It is not permitted. Countries are regularly suspended from international football because of government involvement in national football associations. FIFA has prided itself for not allowing politics in the beautiful game of football. In this, Article 14 clearly stipulates that,
“If a government attempts to dictate, influence, or override refereeing or internal football decisions, FIFA Article 14 allows the organization to suspend the offending country.This ban prevents national teams, clubs, and officials from participating in any international,FIFA-sanctioned football activities”.
But given the Balogun’s red card suspension one is forced to ask whether when it comes to Infantino and Trump, the rules are different?
Reaction
UEFA said the decision was, “unprecedented, incomprehensible and unjustifiable”, warning that it could undermine trust in the rules of the game.UEFA further claimed that FIFA had, “crossed a red line”.
Writing on its website, UEFA had this to say; “We express our disbelief at such an unprecedented, incomprehensible and unjustifiable decision”. The Belgian football federation said it was, “astonished” by FIFA decision.
President Bernd Neuendorf of Germany FA was quick to point to the Trump-Infantino call saying that; “The impression that there has been active political interference in sport must be dispelled”. European Union, (EU) Commissioner for Sport Glenn Micallef said, “decisions on sporting rules… belong to sporting bodies, not politicians”.
Former FIFA president Sepp Blatter wrote; “Red cards are not overturned by political phone calls. They are overturned by rules, evidence and independent bodies”, further stating that, “… football must never become a playground for political power”.
This decision was controversial because it casts questions on political interference. FIFA’s Article 14 says there is no room for politics in football, but the Trump- Infantino dynamic points otherwise.The decision also raises fundamental questions on the integrity of FIFA .Critics say FIFA undermined its own disciplinary system by suspending this red card.
Norway coach Stale Solbakken said; “ it is a bad, bad, bad, bad, bad decision that will hurt the World Cup”. Former England footballer Ian Wright said; ” We’re talking about integrity, people talking about transparency, but you look at some of the things that’s happened in this tournament with certain teams, it’s been … shameful how things can happen, especially as an American player, whether he’s guilty of what he’s done, whether we think he shouldn’t have got it or not. Some of the things that happened in this World Cup have been shameful”.
It is one thing for FIFA to apply a disciplinary provision. It is another thing for the US president to get involved.
Infantino-Trump Dynamics
Which is interesting given the dynamic between FIFA president Gianni Infantino and President Trump.In the lead-up to the World Cup, Infantino spent a remarkable amount of time and money lavishing Trump with praise, gifts and the inaugural “FIFA Peace Prize” — which is now drawing scrutiny. Infantino bestowed President Trump with the inaugural Fifa Peace Prize. However, human rights campaign group FairSquare complained to FIFA’s ethics committee in December 2025, that Infantino broke the governing body’s rules on political neutrality in creating the prize. In this reversal of Balogun’s red card, FIFA President Gianni Infantino acknowledged taking a call from President Donald Trump, whilst Trump said “all” he did was ask for a review. He said he did not tell Infantino to suspend Balogun’s ban.
Conclusion
Rules are set and should consistently apply to all, no sacred cows, no special gloves for some.UEFA and Belgium called it unprecedented and said FIFA had verily crossed a red line. Now the question is, If FIFA can change rules overnight after a phone call from the White House, then the “independent ” rules only apply to who? Smaller nations like Africa, the Caribbean etc , who get the book thrown at them.Powerful nations like the US get a “brilliant decision”. This story is about _“US exceptionalism”_ instead of “equal rules for all members”, a very wrong precedence, moreso, in the beautiful game.
All this fiasco highlights the sovereignty of the beautiful game. Sovereignty of football is called into question against political interference as some commentors have correctly highlighted. EU commissioner in sports correctly said that, decisions on sporting rules… belong to sporting bodies, not politicians.Also, former FIFA President Sir Blatter weighed in the controversy by rightfully saying that football should never become a playground for political power interests to score cheap political scores.Seeing FIFA bend after Trump “phone call” sets a dangerous precedent. If the US President can call FIFA president and get a player reinstated, what happens when an African president calls the Confederation of African Football (CAF) to overturn bans on their players? Imagine the uproar, the hit back and backlash.This whole drama is football neocolonialism in football governance. This is not just about the Balogun tackle. It was about protecting US interests, continued and prolonged presence in the tournament meant that FIFA continues getting US TV ratings, sponsors,Trump’s political backing.That explains why the controversial suspending of a suspension on US striker, Balogun.Hence, integrity was sacrificed at the altar of money, financial interests and geopolitics.Surely, should a player from an African team get banned, was FIFA going to make the same “flexible” call? History says no.
Rules must be universal. If Article 27 can be used for the US, it must be usable for all without needing a presidential call.Today it is Trump and Balogun.Tomorrow it is another big power protecting “their best player”.Meaning best players from powerful nations would be more protected than those from small nations. What will happen to equality and fairness, values which should be central to sporting activities especially in the beautiful game of football.That controversial call to invalidate US striker red card weakend not strengthened FIFA and the integrity and beauty of the beautiful game. All should demand transparency in order to keep this beautiful game beautiful. No need for “political phone calls” from outside.This was not about Balogun tackle, not about whether it was a red card, a yellow card or just a cautionary foul, it is and was about power. When politics overrides sporting law, the nations with least leverage like African nations lose the most, and the beauty of the beautiful game is destroyed.
