Look at the Paraguay game. When striking, Mbappe was trying to optimize for making goals on his own instead of coordinating with Kone or Rabiot.
There were multiple cases in the Paraguay match when Mbappe attempted a goal in a risky manner instead of passing to Kone or Rabiot who were in better positions to score.
Mbappe is basically concentrating on exclusively getting his own goals because he is on track to beat Messi's World Cup record and unlock a mess of sponsorships 4 years ahead of schedule.
Heck, all my Moroccan friends were rooting for a French win explicitly because they think they have a better shot at winning against France based on how France played against Paraguay.
The same lack of team cohesion has been a hanging albatross for Portugal, Germany, Brazil, and Netherlands as well.
But ok.
[0]: https://www.fifa.com/en/tournaments/mens/worldcup/canadamexi...
In the current case it is about reducing the 1-game-ban minimum to an unprecedented zero game ban.
This is something I see so many people forgetting.
The net result of this decision is simply that the USA gets to play with their full squad and you have an actually interesting competition. The reason we as a world spend hundreds of millions of dollars to let athletes play a game for a living is pretty much exclusively for interesting competition. It serves no other socially useful purpose.
Embarrassing for the Belgians and the Europeans to respond any other way than: "we look forward to beating your best team, game on".
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 makes for a more boring sport overall. Look at the the historically great teams like Brazil and Argentina, it's not like they have the success they do because FIFA decided that would be the most entertaining outcome. It's not wrestling.
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 account of a highly controversial on-field decision (itself downstream of a mis-application of VAR).
Let the chips fall where they may, should the USA lose after this, at least they got to make their best attempt at it. That's all I want as a spectator.
I don’t see much controversy. It is a clear red. Being suspended is the risk you face when challenging that hard.
You play with the team you have in the game. Players get injured, suspended or has previous yellows that would leads to a suspension if another is gotten.
That’s all part of the game.
You're entitled to believe it was a red, but it is objectively controversial. It's not just about what you believe, but what about others might believe. If there are enough people that disagree with you, then it is by definition controversial.
https://www.nytimes.com/athletic/7415223/2026/07/01/folarin-...
> You play with the team you have in the game. Players get injured, suspended or has previous yellows that would leads to a suspension if another is gotten.
> That’s all part of the game.
Correct, and players can get re-instated (as happend with Cristiano Ronaldo in the very same tournament) by FIFA per Article 27. That is also part of the game.
The Belgians now need to man up and play the game with a full squad rather than whine about not getting an easy fixture. Seriously just take a step back and take stock of what we are arguing here; it's not as though Belgium are being given a disadvantage, it is simply that they are being asked to play against the full squad. It is rather pathetic to complain about that.
Oh the irony. Why don't the US man up and play within the rules? You president whined and whined and whined, he does nothing but whining every single day.
You are completely morally corrupt. The Americans are cheaters, and nobody will respect them even if they win. "Pathetic" doesn't even start to describe how feckless people who defend this decision are.
>You're entitled to believe it was a red, but it is objectively controversial.
Who won the US presidential election in 2020?
I also think Olise's yellow card was unjustified. I think it should be overturned also. Even without overturning it, at least he still gets to play, so that's good for all of us as spectators.
The process sucks since it's arbitrary. In a better world there would be a universal appeals process.
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.
You can't choose a random player and give them unfair advantage, and argue that it makes the game more enjoyable (for any type of game). It's not what audiences desire.
It actually makes games less enjoyable, for many reasons.
"Does he endanger the safety of his opponent? You could argue it does, but I think it's slightly unfair because it's more of a stepping action that lacks force and intensity to create that red card."
"Is it the right call? I don't think it's the right call...I don't like that being the level that we're calling for a red card. I think that's a yellow card, I don't see that as a red"
After the match, there was continued debate as to whether it should have been a red. Messi didn't get a red card for a nearly identical incident.
FIFA has a rule to handle this sort of situation, and it's Article 27. In my opinion, that is a poor system as any process that's initiated by FIFA is bound to be arbitrary. It would be better to have a universal appeals process, and such a process might very well have resulted in an overturning of the red card nevertheless. Either way, the outcome was correct, even if the path to getting there was flawed.
And just taking a step back and taking stock of what we are arguing here; it's not as though Belgium were given a disadvantage, it is simply that they were being asked to play against the full squad. It was pathetic to complain about that, especially given that Belgium comfortably thrashed the USA's full squad.
As spectators of any sport, that's all we can hope for: take the best of 2 teams and pit them against each other. See where the chips fall. I don't actually enjoy watching an easy fixture, I want it to be a nail biter.
Belgium should have either said nothing, or just said "cool we don't care, we'll beat them either way, game on". Instead, they (and most Europeans) came across as sissies.
Looking ahead, for me personally, I'm hoping football comes home.
Sorry, I can't give details - I only have a vague memory of it. Does anyone else recall?
It was the right outcome, but the wrong process.
With a little push from the President and Secretary of the Treasury.
Hence: “which in practice will be arbitrary.”
It’s on FIFA to correct for that governance failure by making it less arbitrary via a more universal appeals process.
In any case, the rules were followed to the correct decision. It’s just that these rules as written are arbitrarily applied.
5 days ago, FIFA said there was no appeal process. Yesterday, there was a magic reversal.
Had FIFA implemented an appeals panel for the tournament, it would've looked at the incident, deemed it a misapplication of VAR and a wrongful red card, and the world would've moved on. Instead because of their incompetence, the only remedy was via their magic wand, which is arbitrary and capricious.
Two things can be true at the same time:
1. There is no appeals process that USA (or any team) can initiate
2. There is a mechanism that FIFA can initiate to suspend a match ban at their discretion
That is why it's a bad system; as long as it's initiated by FIFA, it will always be arbitrary and capricious.
I‘m actually not sure this statement is true. “The goal is ultimately entertainment” is a thought terminating cliché. What about sportsmanship, competition, beauty, experiencing a common cultural phenomena with the entire world, etc?
But even if this statement is true, FIFA needs to learn from the failure of Eurovision and see that people are not entertained by watching a rigged game. For competition to be fun, it has to be fair.
You see where I'm going with this? I just can't seem to get upset that a red card that isn't a red card for other teams is getting rescinded.
I've literally been watching for decades and nobody seemed to care before.
A ref got a call wrong and that's ok and should be doubled down on according to UEFA. Well, UEFA can just view this as the disciplinary committee getting it wrong and they can just live with that.
WWE is not an apples to apples comparison, as it is widely known among fans that the spectacle aspect of the sport weighs heavier then the competition aspect, as such both the fighters and referees play loosely with the rules to maximize the spectacle aspect. The same is not true of Eurovision, and it for sure is not true of the World Cup and the game of soccer in general.