Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 82 posts

Re: UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

#31

Post by glimshe »

this_user wrote: post #29
glimshe wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a rule to reverse the call on the books. Article 27 allows FIFA to replace the suspension for a probationary period. Of course the online mob didn't bother checking that.

The rule does exist, but in all of World Cup history, it has been used once for this purpose over 50 years ago. During a tournament, it is understood that a red card means an automatic suspension for at least the next match. That is something that is universally applied. FIFA are clearly breaking with precedent here by using an obscure rule to lift the suspension of the host nation's player, which very much looks lik…

So what? It has now been used twice. I challenge anyone who's a soccer fan to look at the play that led to the red card and say "Yeah, that deserved a red card" with a straight face.

The outcome was fair. That was a scandalous red card and a rule that exists to be sparingly used in situations like that was triggered. Hopefully it will keep being sparingly used but they should not hesitate to overturn unjust punishments that are clearly against the spirit of soccer.

Why are people so upset about it? Is Belgium afraid to face the full US squad? If Belgium wins, which is the most likely result, nobody will be able to say "the US could have won if it wasn't for that red card!"

Re: UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

#32

Post by drivingmenuts »

bhupy wrote: post #27
NoboruWataya wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With respect, only an American would think that the competition ceases to be interesting just because the US loses. This is already shaping up to be a really interesting WC with or without the US. Political leaders intervening to give their countries an advantage is what makes it boring. Tilting the scales in favour of a country where you are trying to grow the sport may make financial sense in the short term but it…

> With respect, only an American would think that the competition ceases to be interesting just because the US loses With respect to you, I'm a lifelong football fan. And read more carefully, the argument I am making is not that the competition ceases to be interesting because the US loses. The argument I am making is that the competition ceases to be interesting because the US doesn't get to field its best squad on…

> Let the chips fall where they may, should the USA lose after this, at least they got to make their best attempt at it.

Well, that, and a President who interferes where he has no fucking business whatsoever and a governing body who kowtows to that same President.

This is just flat out cheating. But hey, fuck the rules, right? 'Cause our team got to compete.

Re: UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

#33

Post by banannaise »

Between this and the C.Ronaldo decision, I wonder if we're headed toward a future change to the automatic red card suspension. Part of what makes a red seem extreme for certain fouls is the automatic suspension.

The point of the suspension is to discourage deliberately violent actions when the current match isn't a major concern (i.e. late in games that aren't close, or when the result is largely immaterial). That obviously isn't the case here.

Re: UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

#34

Post by redwoolf »

phlipski wrote: post #13

The rules need to be updated to better ensure accurate calls. If we can agree that Balogun's red card was overkill because his trip wasn't intentional then there should be a way to reverse the call. And Maradona's "hand of god" goal should have been reversed as well. There should be MORE than one ref on the pitch during these games. And spare me the, "This is how's it's always been" argument... It's the World Cup. Le…

The on the pitch call was not a red card. VAR told the ref to go to the monitors to review and then the red card was given. If the on the pitch call stood, which was the right call, then we wouldn't be having the conversation.

The level of scrutiny we place on foot position when determining offsides with VAR is an example of the letter of the law vs the spirit of the law. Offsides was not meant to catch players who were half a foot length beyond the last non-goalie defender.

I'm not sure VAR is the net-benefit we think it is.

Re: UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

#35

Post by 40four »

phlipski wrote: post #13

The rules need to be updated to better ensure accurate calls. If we can agree that Balogun's red card was overkill because his trip wasn't intentional then there should be a way to reverse the call. And Maradona's "hand of god" goal should have been reversed as well. There should be MORE than one ref on the pitch during these games. And spare me the, "This is how's it's always been" argument... It's the World Cup. Le…

I don’t know that there’s anything wrong with the way the rule is written, the issue here is the way VAR was applied. VAR is only supposed to intervene when there is a “Clear and obvious error.”

Balugun’s play certainly “endangered the safety of an opponent”, as the red card rule reads. Intent doesn’t matter as far as the rule goes. But the call on the field will always be subject to the referee’s judgement on the field. They are weighing a variety of factors, and intent plays into that judgment I think.

Bologun’s challenge was certainly red card “worthy”, but I think most people agree that the initial yellow card was the right call, especially since it wasn’t intentional. The ref saw it full speed, made his judgement, and that should have been the end of it.

VAR likely overstepped their mandate here asking for the replay review. I don’t think that was a “Clear and obvious error.” so they influenced the ref to upgrade to red. It’s especially upsetting when there are many other glaring examples of yellow cards in the same tournament that they did not send to review.

Re: UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

#36

Post by rjrjrjrj »

glimshe wrote: post #31
this_user wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rule does exist, but in all of World Cup history, it has been used once for this purpose over 50 years ago. During a tournament, it is understood that a red card means an automatic suspension for at least the next match. That is something that is universally applied. FIFA are clearly breaking with precedent here by using an obscure rule to lift the suspension of the host nation's player, which very much looks lik…

So what? It has now been used twice. I challenge anyone who's a soccer fan to look at the play that led to the red card and say "Yeah, that deserved a red card" with a straight face. The outcome was fair. That was a scandalous red card and a rule that exists to be sparingly used in situations like that was triggered. Hopefully it will keep being sparingly used but they should not hesitate to overturn unjust punishmen…

Doesn't seem fair that Belgium has to alter their game plan the day before the match because FIFA dropped a totally unexpected decision 4 days after unequivocally stating there was no appeal process for the red card suspension.

Re: UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

#37

Post by rjrjrjrj »

bhupy wrote: post #28
lotsofpulp wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is more entertaining if the rules are the same for everyone. It would be fine if the official rule is red card disqualifies from next game until a dignitary calls. Or red card consequences can be modified for the top or most popular player on a team.

You're right, it's a failure of governance that FIFA doesn't have a proper appeals process for everyone to use. It is unfortunate that the only rules-based mechanism to suspend the match ban had to come from FIFA, which in practice will be arbitrary. It was the right outcome, but the wrong process.

> It is unfortunate that the only rules-based mechanism to suspend the match ban had to come from FIFA

With a little push from the President and Secretary of the Treasury.

Re: UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

#38

Post by ortusdux »

40four wrote: post #35
phlipski wrote: post #13

The rules need to be updated to better ensure accurate calls. If we can agree that Balogun's red card was overkill because his trip wasn't intentional then there should be a way to reverse the call. And Maradona's "hand of god" goal should have been reversed as well. There should be MORE than one ref on the pitch during these games. And spare me the, "This is how's it's always been" argument... It's the World Cup. Le…

I don’t know that there’s anything wrong with the way the rule is written, the issue here is the way VAR was applied. VAR is only supposed to intervene when there is a “Clear and obvious error.” Balugun’s play certainly “endangered the safety of an opponent”, as the red card rule reads. Intent doesn’t matter as far as the rule goes. But the call on the field will always be subject to the referee’s judgement on the fi…

The match commentator I was listening to during this game actually predicted an upgrade to a red once the VAR was announced. Their argument was basically what you said, this looks like a yellow live, and a red when viewed slowed down and in isolation. The question is, is this a flaw or a feature of the VAR system?

Re: UEFA slams FIFA's 'unprecedented, unjustifiable' Balogun decision

#39

Post by 5555624 »

this_user wrote: post #29
glimshe wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a rule to reverse the call on the books. Article 27 allows FIFA to replace the suspension for a probationary period. Of course the online mob didn't bother checking that.

The rule does exist, but in all of World Cup history, it has been used once for this purpose over 50 years ago. During a tournament, it is understood that a red card means an automatic suspension for at least the next match. That is something that is universally applied. FIFA are clearly breaking with precedent here by using an obscure rule to lift the suspension of the host nation's player, which very much looks lik…

FIFA also used the rule to allow Cristiano Ronaldo to play in this World Cup. Ronaldo got a red card in a World Cup qualifier, last November, for "violent conduct" (an elbow). It would have kept him out of the opening match for Portugal in this World Cup. He was issued a suspended suspension, under Article 27, allowing him to play.
Post reply on HN