Has Infantino Become a Player on Trump’s Team?
FIFA’s decision to suspend the ban imposed on American forward Folarin Balogun during the 2026 FIFA World Cup, following a phone conversation with the President of the United States, has reignited speculation about an unprecedented level of closeness between the two men.
The decision by the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) to suspend the disciplinary ban imposed on United States striker Folarin Balogun, thereby allowing him to play against Belgium in the Round of 16 of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, has developed into an unprecedented political and sporting controversy. American and European media outlets reported that U.S. President Donald Trump personally intervened and held direct telephone conversations with FIFA President Gianni Infantino, triggering widespread criticism and raising questions about the independence of world football’s governing body.
The controversy began after Balogun was sent off during the United States’ Round of 32 match against Bosnia and Herzegovina. Brazilian referee Raphael Claus issued a straight red card following a Video Assistant Referee (VAR) review after determining that the American striker had planted his boot on the ankle of Bosnian player Tarik Mihramović. Before his dismissal, Balogun had scored his third goal of the tournament, helping the United States secure a 2–0 victory despite playing nearly thirty minutes with ten men.
Under FIFA regulations, the red card automatically carried a one-match suspension. However, only hours before the United States faced Belgium, FIFA’s Disciplinary Committee announced that enforcement of the suspension would be suspended for one year while the red card itself would remain on the player’s disciplinary record, making him eligible to participate in the match.
A legal controversy
In an official statement, the committee said the decision had been taken “pursuant to Article 27 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code.” It explained that enforcement of the suspension would remain suspended throughout a one-year probationary period and would automatically be reinstated if the player committed a similar offence of comparable seriousness during that period, without prejudice to any additional disciplinary sanctions that might subsequently be imposed.
The decision sparked widespread controversy after several American media outlets reported that President Donald Trump had personally intervened in the matter. According to The Wall Street Journal, the White House convened emergency meetings immediately after the match, with Trump reportedly expressing concern that the absence of one of the U.S. national team’s leading forwards could negatively affect the host nation’s campaign in the tournament.
The newspaper added that the President instructed his advisers to examine every available legal option, including reviewing FIFA’s disciplinary regulations, consulting sports law specialists, preparing a legal memorandum challenging the dismissal, and considering an appeal before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) should the suspension remain in place.
Consistent reports published by Axios, Reuters, The Athletic, and several other American media organisations stated that Trump held a direct telephone conversation with Gianni Infantino, requesting that the referee’s decision be reconsidered. According to the American position, reliance on slow-motion VAR footage exaggerated the severity of the challenge and resulted in an inaccurate assessment of the incident.
Neither FIFA nor the White House has issued any official statement confirming or denying those reports.
The Guardian further revealed that the communications extended beyond the President himself, involving senior White House officials. Additional reports suggested that there was broader political backing within the U.S. administration for efforts aimed at securing a review of the disciplinary decision. Several media outlets also reported that U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio supported reconsidering the sanction, a development that many European newspapers viewed as further evidence that the matter had moved beyond sport into the political arena.
Infantino’s relationship with Trump under scrutiny
Although FIFA has maintained that its decision was reached independently, the timing of the announcement—coming only hours after Trump’s reported communications—has once again drawn attention to the close relationship between Gianni Infantino and the American President. That relationship has generated controversy in recent years because of the two men’s frequent public appearances together at World Cup-related events, prompting several European newspapers to question whether those ties may have influenced FIFA’s decision, either directly or indirectly.
The criticism did not begin with the Balogun case. For several months, Infantino’s relationship with Donald Trump has already been the subject of debate across Europe. The British human rights organisation FairSquare published a letter signed by fifty Members of the European Parliament calling on FIFA to launch an urgent investigation into the decision to award Donald Trump the newly created “FIFA Peace Prize,” presented during the 2026 FIFA World Cup Final Draw in December. According to the signatories, the award raises serious concerns regarding FIFA’s institutional neutrality.
The organisation stated that it had referred the matter to FIFA’s Ethics Committee, arguing that Gianni Infantino may have breached the duty of neutrality established under Article 15 of the FIFA Code of Ethics because of what it described as his “clear support for President Trump’s political agenda.” It also announced that it is organising a collective complaint against the FIFA President, noting that thousands of individuals have already joined the initiative within a matter of weeks.
Critics also point to a series of actions that, in their view, reinforce the perception of an unprecedented level of closeness between the two men. These include Infantino’s attendance at Donald Trump’s presidential inauguration in January 2025 as the only senior international sports official present, his subsequent appearance wearing a cap bearing the inscriptions “USA” and “45-47″—a reference to Trump’s two presidential terms—and his repeated praise of the U.S. President’s policies, including publicly suggesting that Trump should be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.
American Relief and Global Concern
United States head coach Mauricio Pochettino strongly defended his player, insisting that the incident “did not deserve a red card under any circumstances.” He also referred to a similar challenge involving Argentina captain Lionel Messi against Algeria, noting that it had not been punished in the same manner. According to Pochettino, his team had “already paid a sufficient price” by playing with ten men for nearly thirty minutes because of what he described as an unfair decision.
Asked about reports claiming that President Donald Trump had intervened in the matter, Pochettino said he was not surprised. He added that football in South America and Europe “is like a religion” and possesses an extraordinary ability to unite people.
The FIFA decision was welcomed with relief inside the United States camp. Captain Christian Pulisic stated that the challenge which led to Balogun’s dismissal “was absolutely not intentional,” adding that he had witnessed more dangerous tackles throughout the tournament that had not received similar punishment. The U.S. Soccer Federation said it learned of the decision through the official statement published on FIFA’s website.
Balogun’s availability is particularly significant for the American national team. Having scored three goals during the tournament, he has equalled Landon Donovan’s tally from the 2010 FIFA World Cup and has become the second-highest American goalscorer in World Cup history, only one goal behind Bert Patenaude, who scored four goals during the inaugural tournament in 1930.
By contrast, the Royal Belgian Football Association rejected the decision, arguing that it contradicts the provisions of FIFA’s disciplinary regulations. In an official statement, it said it was “deeply disappointed” that Balogun had been permitted to play. The federation acknowledged that Article 27 allows the Disciplinary Committee to suspend the enforcement of an already imposed sanction but stressed that the FIFA Disciplinary Code clearly provides that a red card automatically results in suspension for the following match. It argued that the ruling “directly conflicts with the provisions of the 2026 FIFA World Cup Competition Regulations.”
The Belgian federation announced that it is examining all available legal avenues to address the matter.
The Belgian national team issued no immediate official reaction regarding Balogun’s participation. However, according to Belgian media reports, head coach Rudi Garcia expressed surprise at the ruling, arguing that the issue extends far beyond a single match and concerns the integrity of the tournament itself.
Most major European newspapers described the case as a dangerous precedent. The Guardian argued that allowing political influence, even indirectly, over a disciplinary matter threatens the fundamental principle of football’s independence. Spanish and French newspapers similarly warned that the case could establish a system of double standards in which politically influential nations receive preferential treatment unavailable to other football associations.
He further stated that, if reports suggesting that Donald Trump and Gianni Infantino had reached an understanding regarding the case were accurate, it would be “completely insane and would cast doubt on everything,” arguing that “neither man should have any role whatsoever in decisions of this nature.”
Jürgen Klopp also maintained that the incident leading to Balogun’s dismissal “leaves no room for debate—it is a clear red card.” He added that even if some believed the referee had made a mistake, football has always lived with refereeing errors without external political intervention.
Sports media also reported criticism from several other prominent football figures, including Thomas Tuchel, Gary Neville, Wayne Rooney, and Thierry Henry. They argued that any perception that disciplinary sanctions can be altered under political pressure risks undermining the confidence of supporters and national teams in the impartiality of refereeing and disciplinary authorities.
Within the United States, media coverage became divided. Some commentators viewed Trump’s intervention as a legitimate effort to defend the national team and correct what they considered a refereeing error, while others argued that a head of state’s involvement in a FIFA disciplinary matter establishes a precedent that could undermine the independence of international sporting institutions.
Amid the controversy, observers recalled the earlier case involving Portuguese star Cristiano Ronaldo, who was allowed to participate in his country’s opening World Cup match after FIFA suspended enforcement of the final two matches of a three-match suspension imposed following his dismissal during the qualifiers against the Republic of Ireland. FIFA cited that precedent in defence of its authority to suspend the enforcement of certain disciplinary sanctions.
Many analysts believe the controversy has now evolved beyond a single match into a genuine test of FIFA’s institutional independence. Growing questions are being raised over whether Article 27 was applied exceptionally in this case in a manner inconsistent with previous World Cup precedents and whether any other national team would have received identical treatment under similar circumstances.
As the United States prepares to face Belgium in an increasingly tense atmosphere, the repercussions of the controversy are expected to continue long after the tournament concludes. Calls are mounting for FIFA to clarify the legal basis upon which its decision was made and to ensure that political influence never becomes a determining factor in disciplinary decisions at the world’s most prestigious football competition.
