President Donald Trump picked up the phone on Wednesday and called FIFA President Gianni Infantino directly, asking him to review the one-game suspension of American striker Folarin Balogun, and by Sunday afternoon, FIFA had reversed the ban, clearing the 25-year-old to play in the World Cup's Round of 16. The Washington Examiner reported that the New York Times broke the news of Trump's call just hours after FIFA's announcement, setting off a firestorm that stretched from Brussels to Zurich.
Balogun, the leading goal scorer for the United States in the tournament, had been sent off with a straight red card during the Round of 32 match against Bosnia-Herzegovina on Wednesday night, July 1, in Santa Clara, California. He scored the opening goal, then less than 20 minutes later was ejected for inadvertently stepping on an opposing player's ankle while competing for a pass.
Under FIFA's standard rules, a straight red card triggers an automatic one-match suspension, meaning Balogun would miss Monday night's knockout match against Belgium in Seattle. That is, until the president intervened.
FIFA's disciplinary committee invoked Article 27 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code, suspending the match ban and replacing it with a one-year probationary period. The language was precise: if Balogun "commits another infringement of a similar nature and gravity during the probationary period, the suspension will be revoked, and the sanction will be enforced without prejudice to any additional sanction imposed for the new restriction."
In plain terms, the ban wasn't erased. It was shelved, contingent on good behavior.
Trump wasted no time claiming credit. He posted on Truth Social shortly after the announcement:
"Thank you to FIFA for doing what was right, and reversing a great injustice!"
The reversal stunned observers in part because, as Newsmax noted, FIFA officials had initially indicated the automatic suspension could not be appealed. The president's direct call to Infantino apparently changed that calculus.
Trump has not been shy about his engagement with the U.S. men's national team throughout this World Cup cycle. He called the squad before their opening match against Paraguay to rally support, and his interest in Balogun's case followed the same pattern of hands-on involvement in high-profile national moments.
The president made no effort to hide his view of the red card. In comments reported by Breitbart, Trump called the suspension "bogus" and took direct aim at the officiating:
"That wasn't a foul. That wasn't even an infraction. That was two guys running full speed that happened to crash into each other."
He went further, questioning the fairness of punishing a player for a future game based on a disputed call in a past one: "It's one thing to penalize somebody for the game, but how do you penalize them for a game that hasn't even been played yet? It's very unfair."
Trump also described the Brazilian referee, Raphael Claus, as "a little suspect," referencing past match-fixing accusations against Claus from February 2023. Whether those accusations had any bearing on FIFA's internal review remains unclear.
The president's intervention went beyond a single phone call. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and White House task force leader Andrew Giuliani helped assemble a team of lawyers to challenge the use of slow-motion replay in issuing the red card, according to Fox News.
That level of executive mobilization over a soccer call is, to put it mildly, unusual. But Balogun's importance to the American squad is hard to overstate. He started all but one game throughout the tournament and netted two goals in the team's opener against Paraguay. Losing him for a knockout round match against Belgium would have been a significant competitive blow.
The reaction from Europe was swift and sharp. The Royal Belgian Football Association pledged to "investigate all potential options" to "safeguard the legitimate rights of all participating teams and to protect the fundamental principles of fair play in our sport." Belgium appealed the reversal in an attempt to keep Balogun sidelined.
Belgium's coach, Rudi Garcia, did not hold back. Fox News reported his reaction: "I didn't know that in the offices of FIFA the fifth of July was the first of April in Europe", a pointed suggestion that the decision was a joke.
UEFA, European soccer's governing body, called the reversal "incomprehensible and unjustifiable" and said FIFA had "crossed a red line" regarding the integrity of the sport. That phrase, "crossed a red line", carried obvious weight coming from an organization that oversees the Champions League and the European Championship.
Trump's willingness to override established processes when he believes the outcome is wrong has defined much of his presidency, from scrapping a $301 million Reflecting Pool plan in favor of a $1.5 million fix to intervening in international diplomatic disputes. The Balogun case fits the pattern, a president who sees a problem and picks up the phone.
Perhaps the most striking criticism came from former FIFA President Sepp Blatter, himself banned from the organization over ethics violations. Blatter, as the Associated Press reported, issued a lengthy statement that cut to the core of the controversy:
"Red cards are not overturned by political phone calls. They are overturned by rules, evidence and independent bodies. If a U.S. President intervenes with the FIFA President, and a player is suddenly cleared before a World Cup knockout match, the question is unavoidable: Quo vadis, FIFA?"
The irony of Blatter lecturing anyone about institutional integrity was not lost on observers. But the substance of his question, whether FIFA's disciplinary process can withstand political pressure from a host nation's head of state, is a legitimate one, regardless of the messenger.
What neither Blatter nor UEFA addressed is whether the red card itself was justified. The play involved two players running at full speed, with Balogun stepping on an opponent's ankle while competing for a pass. Trump called it inadvertent. Whether FIFA's internal review reached the same conclusion before invoking Article 27 is one of the open questions surrounding the decision.
The call did not happen between strangers. Trump and Infantino have cultivated a visible relationship. In December 2025, Infantino presented Trump with the "FIFA Peace Prize" at an event in Washington, D.C., a gesture that came after Trump was not awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. The two also appeared together at the draw for the 2026 World Cup at the Kennedy Center on December 5, 2025.
That prior relationship adds context to how quickly FIFA moved. Trump called on Wednesday, the same day as the match. By Sunday, the ban was lifted. For an organization not known for speed, that timeline is notable.
Whether the relationship between the two leaders influenced the outcome is a question FIFA has not directly answered. The governing body cited Article 27 and left it at that. Infantino himself has not publicly commented on the call, at least not in any statement captured in available reporting.
The broader debate about presidential leadership and decisive action plays out differently depending on which side of the Atlantic you sit on. In the United States, the president advocated for an American player he believed was wrongly punished. In Europe, critics saw a head of state leaning on a sports governing body to gain a competitive edge for his country.
The U.S. Soccer Federation accepted the decision without drama. Its statement was measured: "We accept the decision of the Disciplinary Committee and are pleased that Folarin Balogun is eligible to compete tomorrow. Our full attention is focused on the Round of 16 match against Belgium in Seattle, and we look forward to the continued support of our amazing fans."
U.S. teammate Christian Pulisic offered a more candid reaction: "Obviously for us it gives us a boost."
Betting markets agreed. U.S. odds to beat Belgium jumped immediately after the news broke that Balogun would be available for the Monday night match, set for 8:00 p.m. Eastern in Seattle.
Belgium's appeal of the reversal adds another layer of uncertainty. If FIFA's disciplinary apparatus bends once under political pressure, or what critics characterize as political pressure, the precedent extends well beyond one match. Every future red card in a tournament hosted by a powerful nation becomes a potential test case.
Trump's defenders will point out that he asked for a review, not a predetermined outcome. "All I did was ask for a review. I didn't think it was a foul," the president told reporters, as the AP reported. FIFA conducted that review and reached its own conclusion under its own code. Whether that conclusion would have been the same without a call from the White House is a question no one at FIFA seems eager to answer.
The pattern of Trump inserting himself into high-stakes situations and forcing outcomes is by now well established. His critics call it overreach. His supporters call it leadership. In this case, an American player who scored goals for his country will take the field Monday night instead of watching from the stands.
Whether that's justice or interference depends on whether you think the red card was right in the first place. And on that question, FIFA, the only body with the authority to decide, sided with the president.