A red card controversy has rocked the World Cup after US President Donald Trump successfully intervened to overturn a ban on striker Folarin Balogun, leaving England pondering whether to appeal Jarell Quansah's own sending off. The Football Association is considering its options after Quansah was sent off in the 54th minute of England's 3-2 last-16 win over Mexico for a high challenge on Jesus Gallardo. As the offence was classed as serious foul play, the Bayer Leverkusen defender could face a two-game ban that would rule him out of the quarter-final against Norway and possibly beyond.
Under current World Cup rules, red cards themselves cannot be appealed. Instead, FIFA can use a little-known clause—Article 27—to suspend any automatic ban. This clause had never been used at a World Cup before Balogun's case. It effectively allows FIFA to make whatever decision it wants without meeting any other criteria. The US authorities argued that Balogun's red card was unfair because there was no intent, but intent was removed from football's laws years ago; only the result of the challenge is meant to be considered. Balogun's red card was not rescinded—FIFA rules do not allow that—but his one-match ban was suspended for 12 months, meaning he was available for the last-16 tie against Belgium. This led to widespread criticism from European football's governing body, Belgium, and England boss Thomas Tuchel.
“Explains World Cup red card appeals and the controversy around Article 27 after Balogun and Quansah cases.”
For England, the Quansah red card adds to an already difficult situation at right-back. First-choice Reece James has been unavailable since injuring a hamstring in the second group match against Ghana, missing games against Panama, DR Congo and Mexico. Quansah himself sustained an injury against Panama but was fit enough to start against Mexico. The right-back position has been a concern for Tuchel, who has used Reece James, Djed Spence, Ezri Konsa, John Stones, Quansah and midfielder Declan Rice as right-sided defenders during the tournament.
The FA is now considering whether to seek a similar intervention for Quansah. However, the two cases differ: Quansah was sliding in with a studs-up challenge, whereas Balogun's was a studs-down-the-back-of-the-ankle challenge that was clearly accidental but would usually result in a sending off. Any appeal would likely rely on the same Article 27 clause, but its use for Balogun has already sparked controversy, with France reportedly challenging Michael Olise's yellow card during their victory over Paraguay.
Q: Can red cards be appealed at the World Cup? No. FIFA rules do not allow appeals against red cards. The only way to avoid a ban is for FIFA to use its discretionary power under Article 27 to suspend the automatic suspension.
Q: What is Article 27 and why is it controversial? Article 27 is a clause in FIFA's rules that gives the organisation the power to make any decision it wants regarding disciplinary matters without meeting any other criteria. It was never used at a World Cup until the Balogun case. Critics argue it undermines the consistency of disciplinary rules and opens the door to political interference.
Q: Why did Donald Trump get involved in Balogun's case? Trump asked FIFA to review Balogun's one-match suspension after he was sent off for a foul on Bosnia-Herzegovina defender Tarik Muharemovic. The US authorities claimed the red card was unfair because there was no intent. FIFA then used Article 27 to suspend the ban for 12 months, allowing Balogun to play against Belgium.
What happens next? The FA must decide quickly whether to approach FIFA for a similar ruling on Quansah. England face Norway in the quarter-finals, and a decision on Quansah's availability could come before that match. The use of Article 27 may also prompt further appeals from other nations, potentially altering the disciplinary landscape for the remainder of the tournament.