Former FIFA referees question different fates of Balogun, Quansah

FIFA's disciplinary decisions are facing renewed scrutiny after two World Cup players received vastly different suspensions for similar offenses. England defender Jarell Quansah was handed a two-match ban following a video review that deemed his studs-up challenge serious foul play. His suspension is not appealable by England's Football Association.

“

FIFA have failed in their duty towards the game after they delayed the ban for Balogun. They allowed outside interference by the president.

In contrast, U.S. striker Folarin Balogun, who committed a comparable offense during a match against Bosnia, received a one-match suspension that FIFA later suspended for one year. FIFA cited Article 27 of its disciplinary code for the probation, but has not publicly elaborated on the reasoning behind this specific leniency.

This disparity has led former international referees to question FIFA's consistency and transparency. Keith Hackett, a former referee, criticized FIFA on social media, stating the organization failed in its duty by delaying Balogun's ban and allowing potential outside interference. He emphasized that both players committed offenses warranting a red card.

“

What everyone wants from referees, they want the correct decisions, yes, but more important always is consistency. That you identify, okay, player A gets the same sanction as player B. Team A gets the same sanction as team B. You know, that's what you expect. And this is not the case when it comes to Quansah and Balogun.

Jonas Eriksson, a former FIFA referee of 16 years, echoed these concerns, arguing that Quansah should have received the same one-match suspension as Balogun, given the similar nature of their challenges. Eriksson stressed the importance of consistent sanctions, stating, "What everyone wants from referees, they want the correct decisions, yes, but more important always is consistency." He added that the lack of clear explanation for Balogun's suspended ban further fuels the controversy.

“

If you're not able to communicate how they interpret the situation - was it an incorrect decision of the referee or was it the wrong application of the laws of the game - we don't know.