Either way, Belgium's hammered the USA even with Balogun. Tis a lol.
No question - they shouldn't have even made it that far
A red can be given for serious foul play.
The ref is intentionally given leeway to make whatever calls necessary to keep control over the game (which is why the reversal is so damaging to the tournament broadly). He had every right to send Balogun off, I just dont think it's was a good one.
Quansah got a red card for England despite playing for and winning the ball
A bunch of reasons why this comparison is bullshit:
- Quansah went into a sliding tackle against a player in control of the play, not after a 50/50 challenge
- despite there not being intent, sliding tackles are held to higher scrutiny because they're dangerous even when done correctly
- The tackle was unnecessarily aggressive. Quansah could have stayed on his feet and defended without risking a tackle
You obviously don't know enough about "soccer". You been listening to your presidents definitions?
I love how catty this is
I don't think we're using 'dangerous' in the same way here. I'm saying there is no reasonable expectation that Balogun's play could have resulted in a serious injury, regardless of what injury almost did occur. Just because Muharemovic's ankle almost did get broken, doesn't mean that was due to any risky, aggressive, or malicious move made by Balogun to begin with. That the foul didn't even initially merit a yellowcard at the time points to the same conclusion.
When I was taught to be a referee (granted, that was 15 years ago), they urged us not to issue red cards unless the play itself was uniquely dangerous, where that if another player committed the same foul there would be the same high risk of injury. The two other remedies for keeping this type of play in-check are more reasonable and less likely to cause chaotic discontent from the bench, and sending the player off doesn't make anyone else on the field any safer.
Your job as referee isn't to doll out justice or retribution for harm committed on the field, it's to keep the players safe and the game fair to the extent reasonable.
That's not the point - he made a needlessly aggressive tackle against an attacker that wasn't an immediate threat on goal, and hit Gallardo midway up the shin with studs up. If someone else on the field made a similarly needless and dangerous tackle, the risk of serious injury would be just as high. It could have just as easily been a yellow card, but what made the tackle worse was that it was done without any apparent strategic advantage over staying on his feet, which made it seem like he did it in part because there was a risk of harm.
If the ref didn't take action, it was likely that the two would continue escalating their challenges until someone did get injured