World Cup 2026: Is Balogun the scandal that could bring down Infantino?

Gianni Infantino has served as the president of FIFA for ten years. Next year, he will face re-election. His tenure has been marked by increasing controversy. Issues have ranged from the FIFA Peace Prize to inflated ticket prices for the World Cup. Now, a new development may test his leadership. FIFA decided to cancel Folarin Balogun’s red-card suspension for the United States’ last-16 match against Belgium. This decision allows Balogun to play, even though World Cup rules typically forbid appeals against red cards. The timing of this choice has raised serious questions about political interference in football.

Folarin Balogun has been the star player for the United States. He has scored three goals in the tournament so far. However, he was sent off in a previous match against Bosnia-Herzegovina. Normally, this would require him to miss the next game. Yet, FIFA reversed its decision. On Monday, more than twenty-four hours after the initial ruling, FIFA released a statement. The statement was 871 words long but provided little explanation for the reversal. Someone else, however, took credit for the outcome. US President Donald Trump stated that he was the one who convinced FIFA officials to make the change.

Trump clarified that he only asked for a review of the decision. He insisted he did not explicitly order Infantino to suspend the ban. Nevertheless, the fact that a head of state intervened is a major concern for the global football community. In the United States, the public narrative focuses on fairness. Many fans believe Balogun has already been punished by missing the remainder of the previous match. They argue that removing him now would be excessive. Trump echoed these sentiments, suggesting the punishment was already sufficient.

Infantino rejected any claims of political interference. He insisted that the disciplinary committee operates independently. However, perception is often as important as reality in sports governance. The decision did not benefit a random team. It helped the host nation, the United States. This outcome is particularly sensitive given the close relationship between Infantino and Trump. The two men have appeared together publicly. Trump has called Infantino his friend. The suspension of the red-card ban felt less like a sporting decision and more like a presidential pardon.

Former Liverpool manager Jurgen Klopp criticized the situation sharply. He stated, "This is our sport, not theirs." He added that if Trump and Infantino made the deal behind closed doors, it would be madness. Such an action would call everything into question. The incident has led to speculation about whether the fallout will put Infantino’s position in doubt. It remains to be seen if this event serves as the tipping point for his presidency.

Image source, Getty Images

FIFA statutes are clear on this matter. Political interference in football is strictly prohibited. Countries are regularly suspended from international competition because of government involvement in their national football associations. For example, Pakistan has been suspended three times in eight years for such violations. This raises a difficult question: Are the rules different when it comes to Infantino and Trump?

The World Cup draw provided a glimpse into this complex relationship. During the draw, Trump received the inaugural FIFA Peace Prize. This moment felt like the culmination of two years of Infantino cultivating a close bond with the US president. When presenting the award, Infantino told Trump, "You can always count, Mr President, on my support, on the support of the entire football community to help you make peace and make the world prosper all over the world." This public display of support has drawn criticism from human rights advocates.

The group FairSquare complained to FIFA’s ethics committee in December. They argued that Infantino broke the rules on political neutrality by creating the prize. FIFA did not respond to the complaint. Last month, fifty members of the European Parliament wrote a new letter demanding action. Like many ethical inquiries within FIFA, there has been no official response.

The controversy continued during the tournament itself. Trump did not attend a single World Cup match. Yet, he publicly claimed ownership of the Balogun situation. This pattern mirrors other incidents where FIFA failed to communicate clearly. Earlier in the year, Somali referee Omar Artan was denied entry to the US by immigration officials. This incident suggested Infantino was losing control of his own World Cup. When asked about Artan’s plight, Infantino gave a glib response. He told reporters to "just chill, relax." These interactions suggest that transparency is rare, and controversy is constant at FIFA.

If one were to list every recent football controversy, the list would be endless. However, the allocation of the 2030 and 2034 World Cup finals stands out. This decision was made two years ago and often goes unnoticed. The 2030 edition was scheduled across three continents: Africa, Europe, and South America. Because the first three matches are in those regions, the 2034 event was effectively guaranteed to go to Asia or Oceania. With no realistic competition, Saudi Arabia was the likely host. Like Qatar, Saudi Arabia faces questions regarding its human rights record. FIFA, under Infantino, had developed a close relationship with the Saudi government.

Norway’s football federation criticized the process. They argued that the bidding method undermined FIFA’s reforms for good governance. They also challenged the trust in FIFA. The Club World Cup is another point of contention. This expanded summer tournament appears to be an unwanted creation by FIFA. It aims to claim a share of the lucrative club game. Sergio Marchi, president of the players’ union FIFPro, stated that it was created without dialogue or respect.

The Balogun situation has allowed unlikely figures to take the moral high ground. Even former FIFA president Sepp Blatter criticized the political maneuvering. Blatter wrote on social media that football must never become a playground for political power. It is ironic, of course, that Blatter offered this critique. He was forced to resign as president after a major corruption scandal. Infantino replaced him in 2016.

UEFA, the governing body for European football, laid down new battle lines on Tuesday. It voiced strong opposition to the Balogun decision. UEFA stated that FIFA had "crossed a red line." It described the ruling as "unprecedented, incomprehensible and unjustifiable." However, this is not the first time UEFA has clashed with FIFA. In May 2025, UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin led a group of European delegates in a walkout. This occurred during a break at the FIFA Congress. Infantino had been on a diplomatic tour of the Middle East with Trump and arrived two hours and seventeen minutes late.

UEFA has used the current World Cup to score political points. When referee Omar Artan finally landed in Somalia, UEFA announced an invitation. Artan was invited to referee the UEFA Super Cup between Paris Saint-Germain and Aston Villa on August 12. Throughout the year, UEFA has also highlighted the lower cost of Euro 2028 tickets compared to World Cup tickets. UEFA does not introduce hydration breaks or red cards for covering mouths, contrasting its policies with FIFA’s.

Infantino’s origins are in Europe. He was once UEFA’s general secretary. He presented Champions League draws for many years. While he is not entirely unwelcome in Europe—he gave a speech at the UEFA Congress in February—there is clear friction between the two organizations. Despite this tension, Infantino’s position appears secure. He is popular with many federations worldwide. Much of this support stems from FIFA’s development programs.

The FIFA Forward program has funded football projects globally. The expansion of the World Cup to forty-eight teams has created opportunities for more nations. Sixteen extra teams now qualify. The vast majority of these spots went to confederations with less depth. Europe received only three additional spots. This World Cup has shown that teams from Asia and Concacaf still have work to do to be competitive. However, Infantino provides a dream for nations that never thought they could reach the World Cup. Countries like Cape Verde, Curacao, Jordan, and Uzbekistan have experienced this hope.

Critics argue the forty-eight-team format creates imbalances. But it allowed Cape Verde to live its dream. It also allows less traditional football nations to grow their game. This growth is arguably a positive for global football. There is a catch, however. Tournaments like the World Cup, and the high ticket prices, pay for these development projects. This year, FIFA is expected to generate $9 billion (£7.9 billion).

UEFA may oppose much of what Infantino stands for, but European football is the wealthy sector of the sport. It largely funds itself. The rest of the world depends on Infantino and the money FIFA generates. There are 211 countries in FIFA. Each gets a vote on the presidency. One hundred and six votes are needed to win. The math currently favors Infantino. In April, CONMEBOL, the South American confederation, announced its ten countries would back him. Three weeks later, the Confederation of African Football confirmed unanimous backing from its fifty-four members. The Asian Football Confederation’s forty-seven nations followed suit.

Infantino already has 111 votes. He cannot be beaten by the current count. Even if UEFA could find a candidate capable of mounting a challenge, the race is effectively over. Infantino was re-elected unopposed in 2019 and 2023. It would take something truly remarkable for anyone to stand against him in 2027, let alone defeat him. The Balogun scandal may stain his legacy, but it does not appear to threaten his power.