FIFA World Cup 2026

[dwy000]

6 minutes ago, Castanza said:

 

Unprecedented doesn't mean incorrect. FIFA created Article 27 for a reason. Also it was created in 2023 so this is the first World Cup tournament it has been available for. You can't cherry pick rules....

 

@dwy000 @Kizion The rules are not being "fairly applied". You guys keep glossing over the Messi tackle that was much worse by all standards and it was reviewed by VAR team and no car was ruled. That is no being applied fairly. 

 

So if you are going to have tech to "improve the officiating of the game." Then use it fairly and accurately. If the ref isn't pulling a Yellow card in real time to make a call how the F can you say it's fair to make a call after you watch the replay and especially a Red? Plus VAR isn't supposed to be used in slow motion. FIFA explicitly stated this as a reason. 

 

 

I have yet to see anyone suggest that it was a good, fair call.  And if it was overturned under the normal appeal process, everyone would probably have gone "good" and it wouldnt be an issue.  Its the fact that FIFA bypassed the appeal process and didn't give Belgium a fair chance to respond that is the issue. Not to mention that all of that happened after the President (and FIFA Peace Prize winner) publicly announced that he called the FIFA head to overturn it.

 

Ironically most people would have been on the US's side on this and now, as you point out, the US will have a big asterisk next to their name regardless of outcome. 

[Castanza]

1 minute ago, Paarslaars said:

people care because this is a fkn US president enforcing rule-breaking favors during a world cup.

 

I agree it's a travesty the US President pushed on this. But you still ignore the rule that makes this a legitimate move by FIFA based on article 27. Now we can argue they might never have made the change without pressure from Trump (I would agree)...but the ability and latitude to do so still exists. 

 

So stop complaining about the "rules" not being followed and "fairness of application to all" and we can continue to bitch together about the intrusion of politics into the game. 

 

I hope FIFA reverses it and maintains the integrity of the game. But FIFAs integrity did not change with this call. It was already long gone....

[Paarslaars]

The VAR is ready 

[Castanza]

2 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

I have yet to see anyone suggest that it was a good, fair call.  And if it was overturned under the normal appeal process, everyone would probably have gone "good" and it wouldnt be an issue.  Its the fact that FIFA bypassed the appeal process and didn't give Belgium a fair chance to respond that is the issue. Not to mention that all of that happened after the President (and FIFA Peace Prize winner) publicly announced that he called the FIFA head to overturn it.

 

Ironically most people would have been on the US's side on this and now, as you point out, the US will have a big asterisk next to their name regardless of outcome. 

There is no appeal process in the World Cup. The US team did not and could not appeal. 

[Paarslaars]

2 minutes ago, Castanza said:

But you still ignore the rule that makes this a legitimate move by FIFA based on article 27.

 

I can concede to this when I see it applied more frequently in the future, without political involvement.  But I remain convinced if it was our player, there was no way we would be able to make FIFA make the same decision.

Edited 1 hour ago by Paarslaars

[Jaygo]

41 minutes ago, shhughes1116 said:

This shouldn't even have been a foul.  I say that as someone who saw (and was on the receiving end of) plenty of studs-up challenges, and stomping, while playing in Italy and in the United States.

 

Id love to hear more about this, were you pro?

[dwy000]

2 minutes ago, Castanza said:

There is no appeal process in the World Cup. The US team did not and could not appeal. 

Im far from a FIFA expert but was just going by the fact that they have an Appeals Committee and Belgiums response: "To date, the RBFA has still not received any grounds for this decision, nor has it received the information it has been requesting since the start of this procedure for a copy of the decision and the motivation declaring the player eligible as well as the referee’s report. Which is a breach of FIFA regulations"

[Castanza]

Just now, dwy000 said:

Im far from a FIFA expert but was just going by the fact that they have an Appeals Committee and Belgiums response: "To date, the RBFA has still not received any grounds for this decision, nor has it received the information it has been requesting since the start of this procedure for a copy of the decision and the motivation declaring the player eligible as well as the referee’s report. Which is a breach of FIFA regulations"

 

World Cup rules are there is no formal appeal process for standard Red Cards with one game suspensions. FIFA can unilaterally choose to review something (Article 27). Belgium attempted to appeal through their federation but the FIFA Appeal Committee ruled it inadmissible as of now. 

 

[dwy000]

Just now, Castanza said:

 

World Cup rules are there is no formal appeal process for standard Red Cards with one game suspensions. FIFA can unilaterally choose to review something (Article 27). Belgium attempted to appeal through their federation but the FIFA Appeal Committee ruled it inadmissible as of now. 

 

 

 

"Unilaterally" is doing a lot of work in this case. 

[Castanza]

Just now, dwy000 said:

"Unilaterally" is doing a lot of work in this case. 

 

Why? VAR was used incorrectly, there was no Yellow issued in real time by the ref and Article 27 gives them provision to do so. You don't have to like it because it's the first case of the rule being applied...but the rules are being applied per how they are written. So far VAR is a complete joke and nobody is using it as it was intended. It's being used to subjectively and selectively apply or not apply penalties to key players. Technology is supposed to introduce more clarity and consistency. If it is not doing those things then what the Hell is the point of it? 

[dwy000]

5 minutes ago, Castanza said:

 

Why? VAR was used incorrectly, there was no Yellow issued in real time by the ref and Article 27 gives them provision to do so. You don't have to like it because it's the first case of the rule being applied...but the rules are being applied per how they are written. So far VAR is a complete joke and nobody is using it as it was intended. It's being used to subjectively and selectively apply or not apply penalties to key players. Technology is supposed to introduce more clarity and consistency. If it is not doing those things then what the Hell is the point of it? 

Because the ruling only came after intervention by the US President (and FIFA Peace Prize recipient).  If FIFA did it unilaterally, great. But does anyone still think it was unilateral?  Hence the asterisk. 

[Gregmal]

39 minutes ago, Paarslaars said:

You think any other country, including the US, would act differently than Belgium in this situation? 

Who knows? That doesn’t change the fact that any competitor whom doesn’t actually want to be the best by beating the best others have to offer is a lesser person/team.

[Gregmal]

3 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

Because the ruling only came after intervention by the US President (and FIFA Peace Prize recipient).  If FIFA did it unilaterally, great. But does anyone still think it was unilateral?  Hence the asterisk. 

It’s amazing how anything tangentially related to Trump sends you mental. 

[dwy000]

Just now, Gregmal said:

It’s amazing how anything tangentially related to Trump sends you mental. 

Only because its amazing how he manages to fuck up everything he gets involved with, usually making the US look foolish. 

[shhughes1116]

14 minutes ago, Jaygo said:

 

Id love to hear more about this, were you pro?

Yeah I was compensated to play.  Relatively speaking, I wasn't very good.  You reach a level where your brain can't compensate for differences in raw physical ability, and sadly I needed a little more help on the genetics side of things.  Fortunately I figured that out while I was young and decided to get a real job. 
 

if I had kept going, maybe I could have been a 2nd or 3rd choice goalkeeper on a Serie A side, or maybe a starting goalkeeper on a Serie B side.  However, at this time, it wasn't just about pure talent and physical ability.  The Bosman ruling also complicated things for me.     

[Castanza]

Just now, dwy000 said:

Because the ruling only came after intervention by the US President (and FIFA Peace Prize recipient).  If FIFA did it unilaterally, great. But does anyone still think it was unilateral?  Hence the asterisk. 

 

Did VAR Board unilaterally not give Messi a Red Card? Or do you think they thought..."Should we really ban Messi the best player in the world from the World Cup?" That's just AS corrupt and didn't even require a President to get it done! 

 

 

[thowed]

I somehow just knew this was going to turn into a new Political Thread lol.

[dwy000]

2 minutes ago, Castanza said:

 

Did VAR Board unilaterally not give Messi a Red Card? Or do you think they thought..."Should we really ban Messi the best player in the world from the World Cup?" That's just AS corrupt and didn't even require a President to get it done! 

 

 

So that was a unilateral decision by the governing body. No idea if it was right or wrong but im guessing the Argentinean president didn't call FIFA.  

The point is not whether FIFA got it right or wrong its that the US looks like sore losers when they would have had most of the world agreeing with them. 

 

[LC]

4 hours ago, Kizion said:

hope I can watch an unrigged game of football and celebrate in the end. 

 

Need to go back in time decades for this

[Gregmal]

Meanwhile in the Olympics for hockey there was pretty universal consensus among players that “it doesn’t mean as much winning when you don’t even allow the Russian players to compete”. Soccer? Pfffft…total joke

[Xerxes]

1 hour ago, Paarslaars said:

The VAR is ready 

 

lol

 

We want to keep this thread politics-free

looks like Trump made sure it wasn’t 

[Castanza]

10 minutes ago, dwy000 said:

So that was a unilateral decision by the governing body. No idea if it was right or wrong but im guessing the Argentinean president didn't call FIFA.  

The point is not whether FIFA got it right or wrong its that the US looks like sore losers when they would have had most of the world agreeing with them. 

 

 

The Argentinian President doesn't have to call. Messi's clout and influence on marketing, sales, and viewership speak for itself. People need to stop acting like sports have any integrity at all anymore....There is no integrity when billions of dollars are involved and all hinge on viewership/merch sales and ticket sales. Take a look at the sellout landscape of College Football (American version). Integrity, tradition, sportsmanship, have been dead for a long time. That's why there is such growth in Non-League Football. 

 

 

[Paarslaars]

39 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

Who knows? That doesn’t change the fact that any competitor whom doesn’t actually want to be the best by beating the best others have to offer is a lesser person/team.

Hey we agree on that, I am glad he is playing, I just disapprove the way it happened. Should have just been yellow.

[Aurelius]

Peak comedy: 

 

 

[dwy000]

1 minute ago, Castanza said:

 

The Argentinian President doesn't have to call. Messi's clout and influence on marketing, sales, and viewership speak for itself. People need to stop acting like sports have any integrity at all anymore....There is no integrity when billions of dollars are involved and all hinge on viewership/merch sales and ticket sales. Take a look at the sellout landscape of College Football (American version). Integrity, tradition, sportsmanship, have been dead for a long time. That's why there is such growth in Non-League Football. 

 

 

I completely agree with that.  Which is why FIFA probably would have acted unilaterally anyways.  They need the viewers in the US.