ChaoticMusings

Red Okktober · Musing at the Chaos

World Cup

Maddog · Still Here!

Since we had our full complement of players last night, there won't be any excuses for our ass kicking. Had Balogun been on the bench, and the US lost by one goal, that would have tainted the tournament too. The vast majority of the experts thought that card was bullshit, and the majority of Americans knew that the people with the funny accents also thought it was bullshit.

While the reversal shouldn't have gone down like it did, it took a bad call out of the equation and let the players determine the correct outcome. Unlike in say 1986................

Red Okktober · Musing at the Chaos

Maddog wrote:
Since we had our full complement of players last night, there won't be any excuses for our ass kicking. Had Balogun been on the bench, and the US lost by one goal, that would have tainted the tournament too. The vast majority of the experts thought that card was bullshit, and the majority of Americans knew that the people with the funny accents also thought it was bullshit.

While the reversal shouldn't have gone down like it did, it took a bad call out of the equation and let the players determine the correct outcome. Unlike in say 1986................

Your president has fucked up the WC from America's POV by sticking his uneducated nose in. Balogun has become a scapegoat - he made the tackle, but it is not his fault what has happened subsequently.

Dangerous play whereby you endanger the safety of an opponent doesn't have to be intentional. It sets a standard whereby players have to have a sense of caution and not just steam in gung ho

Stills of Balogun's tackle show his opponent's ankle bent over at an acute angle, and it is pure luck that it didn't break. The red card was deserved.

Vam · Go Outside.

@ Red…can I ask what you thought of the referee in the Argentina/Egypt game?

it’s mystifying me that an amazing Egypt goal was disallowed, because the ref decided that an Argentinian player had been fouled at the other end of the field. Yet after Argentina scored, a very similar foul on an Egyptian player was ignored, despite everyone begging the ref to check it out.

It didn’t seem fair to me 🤷🏻‍♀️

Red Okktober · Musing at the Chaos

Vam wrote:
@ Red…can I ask what you thought of the referee in the Argentina/Egypt game?
it’s mystifying me that an amazing Egypt goal was disallowed, because the ref decided that an Argentinian player had been fouled at the other end of the field. Yet after Argentina scored, a very similar foul on an Egyptian player was ignored, despite everyone begging the ref to check it out.
It didn’t seem fair to me 🤷🏻‍♀️

The downfield foul on the Argentinian was outside the penalty box, so resulted in Egypt's goal being cancelled out and a regular free kick to Argentina.

Whereas the alleged foul on the Egyptian prior to the Argentine goal, was inside the box, so if the goal was cancelled out due to foul play, it would also have meant a penalty kick to Egypt. So a 2 goal swing, with Egypt winning instead of losing on that one decision. Fouls come under far more scrutiny inside the penalty box, so bad luck on Egypt it happened there, as it wasn't bad enough for a penalty but probably would have been a free kick (and a cancelled Argentine goal) if outside the box.

As an aside, I'm loving that dark haired lineswoman who holds up the substitute and added time board - she's tiny but doesn't take any shit from anyone, and will grab hold of anyone if they try and come on even 1 second early.

Maddog · Still Here!

Red Okktober wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Since we had our full complement of players last night, there won't be any excuses for our ass kicking. Had Balogun been on the bench, and the US lost by one goal, that would have tainted the tournament too. The vast majority of the experts thought that card was bullshit, and the majority of Americans knew that the people with the funny accents also thought it was bullshit.

While the reversal shouldn't have gone down like it did, it took a bad call out of the equation and let the players determine the correct outcome. Unlike in say 1986................
Your president has fucked up the WC from America's POV by sticking his uneducated nose in. Balogun has become a scapegoat - he made the tackle, but it is not his fault what has happened subsequently.
Dangerous play whereby you endanger the safety of an opponent doesn't have to be intentional. It sets a standard whereby players have to have a sense of caution and not just steam in gung ho
Stills of Balogun's tackle show his opponent's ankle bent over at an acute angle, and it is pure luck that it didn't break. The red card was deserved.

Andy Davies (@andydaviesref) is a former Select Group referee, with over 12 seasons on the elite list, working across the Premier League and Championship. With extensive experience at the elite level, he has operated within the VAR space in the Premier League and offers a unique insight into the processes, rationale and protocols that are delivered on a World Cup matchday.

"Balogun can feel unfortunate to be red carded in this situation as, in my opinion, this was not a red card offense. With both players challenging for ball, the contact from Balogun on Muharemovic, while it looked bad in slow motion, was purely accidental and an unfortunate result from two players challenging for possession of the ball in a normal football movement."

He's not the only person far more qualified than anyone on this board to opine, that has come the same conclusion. In fact, outside of this board, Ive seen no one impartial and well qualified, that didn't think that call was bull shit.

Maddog · Still Here!

Rooney then launched into an angry rant, saying: "I think it's an absolute disgrace, I really do.

"I know it's UEFA but I got a three-game ban before Euro 2012. I was due to miss the three group games and I got told if I went over to Switzerland and did a training session with a bunch of kids, my third game would get taken off. I agreed to do it because I didn't want a three-game ban but I thought that was wrong.

"For this to be suspended, they either take the red card away which is probably the right decision and then he can play. But to suspend it for a year? I think it's an absolute disgrace. Infantino should be ashamed of this.

Rooney's colleague Micah Richards then chimed in: "It's an absolute farce isn't it? It wasn't a red card. Balogun was trying to protect the ball and he went down, it happens, football is a contact sport. To have it suspend it for a year makes a mockery of the whole tournament."

https://www.aol.com/entertainment/wayne-rooney-calls-fifas-folarin-015332870.html

I didn't need to Google Rooney. I know who he is. I had to Google Micah Richards. I think they both know a little bit about the game.

Barksdale · Musing at the Chaos

Maddog wrote:
He's not the only person far more qualified than anyone on this board to opine, that has come the same conclusion. In fact, outside of this board, Ive seen no one impartial and well qualified, that didn't think that call was bull shit.

The slow motion replay and stills make the tackle look worse than it is to be fair. Having watched it again in real time there probably isn't enough force to be deemed serious foul play but it is a subjective call.

So Balogun may have the right to feel hard done by as the red card to my knowledge still stands and he may have been fined for it. However, the point of VAR is to help ensure the quality and primacy of on-field decisions. Otherwise what you have is the situation which is springing up now - challenges post match with rulings by committees rather than the certainty of teams knowing what the position is when the game is concluded and planning their tactics for the next game based on that.

Vam · Go Outside.

Red Okktober wrote:
Vam wrote:
@ Red…can I ask what you thought of the referee in the Argentina/Egypt game?
it’s mystifying me that an amazing Egypt goal was disallowed, because the ref decided that an Argentinian player had been fouled at the other end of the field. Yet after Argentina scored, a very similar foul on an Egyptian player was ignored, despite everyone begging the ref to check it out.
It didn’t seem fair to me 🤷🏻‍♀️
The downfield foul on the Argentinian was outside the penalty box, so resulted in Egypt's goal being cancelled out and a regular free kick to Argentina.
Whereas the alleged foul on the Egyptian prior to the Argentine goal, was inside the box, so if the goal was cancelled out due to foul play, it would also have meant a penalty kick to Egypt. So a 2 goal swing, with Egypt winning instead of losing on that one decision. Fouls come under far more scrutiny inside the penalty box, so bad luck on Egypt it happened there, as it wasn't bad enough for a penalty but probably would have been a free kick (and a cancelled Argentine goal) if outside the box.
As an aside, I'm loving that dark haired lineswoman who holds up the substitute and added time board - she's tiny but doesn't take any shit from anyone, and will grab hold of anyone if they try and come on even 1 second early.

Thanks for clarifying, Red. The game was so high-octane and intense, it was hard for me to keep track of exactly where both fouls happened. But to my layperson’s eye, the referee didn’t seem to be ruling even-handedly.

The confrontation and fight that almost broke out between Messi, the Egyptian coaching team, and the ref was a bad look but understandable, imo. WHY did Messi feel the need to approach the Egypt team’s dugout, to ask why they were angry 🙄

I hadn’t noticed the little firecracker lineswoman, but I’ll look out for her now! 😉

Vam · Go Outside.

My two cents, fwiw…

The legitimacy of the Balogun’s Red Card decision should not really still be the issue. Rightly or wrongly, bad referee calls can happen to any player. One can only hope that the technology in place would right any wrong.

There are 2 issues that have subsequently made the whole situation much, much worse, and turned it all into an international scandal.

1. The demonic Orange menace should never have inserted his meddling arse into the controversy, and then publicly brag about it. The result of which only served to exacerbate many people’s suspicions about how corrupt Infantino is.

2. Once Balogun’s ban was lifted, the USMNT‘s management team should have publicly voiced their concerns about the probable fallout as a result of Infantino’s decision. And certainly, Balogun himself should have respectfully declined to participate in the match against Belgium.

I’d call the result of that match a kind of karmic ‘health check’…. 🤷🏻‍♀️

-- Edited by Vam on Wednesday 8th of July 2026 10:52:52 AM

Barksdale · Musing at the Chaos

Vam wrote:
And certainly, Balogun himself should have respectfully declined to participate in the match against Belgium.

I agree with your analysis apart from this.

If you are available to play, and your coach selects you to play, then you play. Otherwise you deprive your team the best possible chance of winning. It shouldn't be on individual players to make such a wide ranging decision which impacts their team and the hopes of its fans.

Justice prevailed in the end.

Date: Jul 8 11:01 AM, 2026

Vam wrote:

1. The demonic Orange menace should never have inserted his meddling arse into the controversy, and then publicly brag about it. The result of which only served to exacerbate many people’s suspicions about how corrupt Infantino is.

The game should be all about integrity, sadly something they both lack.

Vam · Go Outside.

Barksdale wrote:
Vam wrote:
And certainly, Balogun himself should have respectfully declined to participate in the match against Belgium.
I agree with your analysis apart from this.
If you are available to play, and your coach selects you to play, then you play. Otherwise you deprive your team the best possible chance of winning. It shouldn't be on individual players to make such a wide ranging decision which impacts their team and the hopes of its fans.
Justice prevailed in the end.

And on that we can both agree

(completely off-topic…I also very much agree with your avi. I love it loads! 😂)

Barksdale · Musing at the Chaos

Vam wrote:
(completely off-topic…I also very much agree with your avi. I love it loads! 😂)

Yes, it cracks me up too!

Anyway I cannot wait for the world to discover this weekend that Dan Burn is taller than Haaland, can match his physically and aerial duels are a 50/50 battle between them.

Come on Englaaaaaaand.

Vam · Go Outside.

Barksdale wrote:
Anyway I cannot wait for the world to discover this weekend that Dan Burn is taller than Haaland, can match his physically and aerial duels are a 50/50 battle between them.
Come on Englaaaaaaand.

Yep… that’s looking to be real clash of the Titans stuff 🫣

The question is, do these two humongous lumps of muscle and brawn have the same mystical, whimsical personalities? I mean, what are the chances Erling persuades Dan to plop down mid-match to join him in some serene meditation? 🤣 … 👇🏻

Barksdale · Musing at the Chaos

Vam wrote:
Barksdale wrote:
Anyway I cannot wait for the world to discover this weekend that Dan Burn is taller than Haaland, can match his physically and aerial duels are a 50/50 battle between them.
Come on Englaaaaaaand.
Yep… that’s looking to be real clash of the Titans stuff 🫣
The question is, do these two humongous lumps of muscle and brawn have the same mystical, whimsical personalities? I mean, what are the chances Erling persuades Dan to plop down mid-match to join him in some serene meditation? 🤣 … 👇🏻

I very much doubt Haaland will convince Dan Burn to join him in some meditation, he's just not that kind of guy

I think it's next to inevitable that Haaland will score because not only does he have aerial threat he is also pretty quick. Our best bet may be able to choke the supply to him by being tight in midfield. Hopefully, given both Guehi and Stones play with him at Man City as well they will have some knowledge on how to neutralise the threat.

We have some issues though as both Declan Rice and Jude are on yellow cards. If they get another they will miss the semi-finals if we win.

Red Okktober · Musing at the Chaos

Maddog wrote:
Rooney then launched into an angry rant, saying: "I think it's an absolute disgrace, I really do.

"I know it's UEFA but I got a three-game ban before Euro 2012. I was due to miss the three group games and I got told if I went over to Switzerland and did a training session with a bunch of kids, my third game would get taken off. I agreed to do it because I didn't want a three-game ban but I thought that was wrong.

"For this to be suspended, they either take the red card away which is probably the right decision and then he can play. But to suspend it for a year? I think it's an absolute disgrace. Infantino should be ashamed of this.

Rooney's colleague Micah Richards then chimed in: "It's an absolute farce isn't it? It wasn't a red card. Balogun was trying to protect the ball and he went down, it happens, football is a contact sport. To have it suspend it for a year makes a mockery of the whole tournament."

https://www.aol.com/entertainment/wayne-rooney-calls-fifas-folarin-015332870.html

I didn't need to Google Rooney. I know who he is. I had to Google Micah Richards. I think they both know a little bit about the game.

Unfortunately for the US team, neither Rooney or Richards were reffing the match. Not all red cards are clear and obvious, and many, like this one, are contentious, so you will get divided opinion. We get this every week in the UK over club football, and pundits will come out and say their piece. The two people whose opinions did count for something, the ref and VAR, were of the opinion it was a red card challenge.

The US team claimed the red card was unfair because there was no intent. However, intent in physical contact isn't part of the laws of football - the end result of an action is though, whether intended or not. I realise that the USA are new to top level football, but I would have thought they they would have had a basic understanding of those laws.

Studs down the back of an opponents ankle is deemed dangerous or reckless and worthy of a red card. Some will agree and some won't

Red Okktober · Musing at the Chaos

Barksdale wrote:
Vam wrote:
And certainly, Balogun himself should have respectfully declined to participate in the match against Belgium.
I agree with your analysis apart from this.
If you are available to play, and your coach selects you to play, then you play. Otherwise you deprive your team the best possible chance of winning. It shouldn't be on individual players to make such a wide ranging decision which impacts their team and the hopes of its fans.
Justice prevailed in the end.

Players are surrounded by so many advisors, and someone should have told him that this controversy is going to follow him around. I would have taken him to one side and asked him if he was sure that he wanted to go ahead and play, as the repercussions will be big and long lasting.

He didn't even have to make a big deal out of it, just a last minute injury would have done the trick.

It's 100% not his fault that he finds himself in this situation, but once in the situation, I don't think he took the best course of action to protect his future career. The boo boys will be out in force whenever he touches the ball, as will cries of 'cheat'

Red Okktober · Musing at the Chaos

Here she is - Katia Itzel Garcia of Mexico. she's a tough cookie, and not bad looking for a referee either!

Vam · Go Outside.

Red Okktober wrote:
Barksdale wrote:
Vam wrote:
And certainly, Balogun himself should have respectfully declined to participate in the match against Belgium.
I agree with your analysis apart from this.
If you are available to play, and your coach selects you to play, then you play. Otherwise you deprive your team the best possible chance of winning. It shouldn't be on individual players to make such a wide ranging decision which impacts their team and the hopes of its fans.
Justice prevailed in the end.
Players are surrounded by so many advisors, and someone should have told him that this controversy is going to follow him around. I would have taken him to one side and asked him if he was sure that he wanted to go ahead and play, as the repercussions will be big and long lasting.
He didn't even have to make a big deal out of it, just a last minute injury would have done the trick.
It's 100% not his fault that he finds himself in this situation, but once in the situation, I don't think he took the best course of action to protect his future career. The boo boys will be out in force whenever he touches the ball, as will cries of 'cheat'

That’s the way I see it too. But also, his own personal moral code should have played a part too. Maybe he should have felt a little solidarity with all the other players who were given red cards, but who didn’t have their government heads intervening to tip the ante in their favour.

As you say, he didn’t have to make a big deal about a respectful refusal to play. But he then would have been viewed as more of a hero, rather than a pariah.

To put his own long-term future and public image at risk, all for the sake of one match - it’s bizarre! 🤷🏻‍♀️