CK Updates
World Cup 2026: Balogun decision leaves red card system in disarray
There is one overriding question many people are now asking. How?
Fifa’s disciplinary code states that Balogun should receive a ban of “at least two matches for serious foul play”.
Indeed, the World Cup rules do not allow teams to appeal against a red card.
Fifa’s statement offered no reason or explanation for suspending Balogun’s ban. It just cited “article 27 of the Fifa disciplinary code”.
Article 27 allows Fifa “to fully or partially suspend the implementation of a disciplinary measure”.
It is a wide-ranging rule that allows Fifa to effectively make whatever decision it wants without having to meet any other criteria.
Article 27 has never before been used at a World Cup.
In addition, Balogun’s suspended ban is only for one match, not two as per the disciplinary code. This has not been explained.
BBC Sport has asked why this happened.
But we were not provided with any reasoning. We were simply directed to Cristiano Ronaldo’s suspended ban before this tournament.
Under Fifa’s disciplinary code, Ronaldo should have received a three-match ban for elbowing Dara O’Shea during Portugal’s 2-0 qualifying defeat by the Republic of Ireland in November.
He served one match in the final qualifier against Armenia – but the remaining two games of the ban were suspended.
Ronaldo’s red card, though, was received in qualifying. It was not a red card at a World Cup.
There have been many cases of players being shown some leniency before a tournament, not just Ronaldo.
See France’s Laurent Koscielny in 2014, or Ecuador’s Moises Caicedo and Argentina’s Nicolas Otamendi before this World Cup.
At least with Ronaldo, we were given some justification, with Fifa saying it had taking into account that “he had no red cards in his other 225 international appearances”.
With Balogun, we did not even get that.
It has left a vacuum of information which can only lead to speculation.
Why was this a special case? What factors were taken into account? Who made the decision?
BBC Sport has been told there are no suggestions that the referee asked for the suspension to be removed, or that video assistant referee protocol was not respected.
In England, the Football Association would publish the full written reasons.
The United States have the right to ask Fifa to publish them, Belgium do not.
BBC Sport pundit Micah Richards, a former England defender, said it was a farce.
“To have it suspended for a year makes a mockery of the whole tournament,” he said.
“It is to keep the big stars in the competition. How can that happen? Fifa needs to do better.
“It has left a bad taste in a lot of people’s mouths.”
Belgium are, of course, furious. They issued a statement on Sunday saying they were “astonished” that Balogun had been cleared to play.
The Belgian FA referenced several regulations, workshop presentations and pre-tournament co-ordination meetings.
They are adamant that the decision contradicts the tournament regulations which state that a player “will automatically be suspended from their team’s subsequent match”.
In effect, they say Fifa used its disciplinary code to override the competition regulations.
Belgium head coach Rudi Garcia, speaking at a news conference, went further. He said: “I didn’t know that [at] the Fifa World Cup 5 July is now 1 April, and that is April Fool’s.
“We are not defending the national team or the federation, we’re defending football.”
What must the other players sent off at this tournament be thinking?
Take Qatar’s Assim Madibo, involved in an unfortunate incident which led to a broken leg for Canada’s midfielder Ismael Kone.
There is a clear case here that Madibo did not even make a challenge, that the injury happened by chance and not because of the nature of the tackle.
Yet Fifa handed Madibo a five-game ban – an extra three on top of the standard punishment for serious foul play.
CK Updates
Northern Ireland: Eligibility rules ‘not particularly fair’ – Michael O’Neill
Under the Good Friday Agreement – the 1998 peace accord that followed the conflict colloquially known as The Troubles – those born in Northern Ireland can hold both British and Irish passports.
A Court of Arbitration for Sport ruling in 2010 means players born anywhere on the island of Ireland are able to represent the Republic of Ireland regardless of whether they fulfil any other measure of eligibility, namely being born in the territory, having a biological mother, father, grandmother or grandfather born in the territory, or having lived there for an uninterrupted period of five years.
Players born in the Republic of Ireland, however, cannot represent Northern Ireland unless they are otherwise eligible.
“We exploit eligibility, the same as every other country does, down to the grandparent rule, but this is a rule which is obviously unique between ourselves and the FAI [Football Association of Ireland],” said O’Neill.
“I think everyone recognises it’s not particularly fair, but as I say, our focus is to make sure our pathway for our young players is as good as possible and that’s a pathway for boys from any part of the community.”
In May, FAI director of football John Martin said the organisation should at “the bare minimum” be sounding out eligible players.
“We know there are kids out there who want to play for Ireland who haven’t been approached in the past,” said Martin.
“That’s not right. It’s making sure we have a presence and we understand all the players available to us, and that they are being monitored and tracked.”
When asked whether the narrative around young players in or around his squad is tiresome to him, O’Neill said: “It would have been in the past, it’s not tiresome now.
“We have people who comment on this and talk about nationality and talk about identity and talk about all these different things, which are part of being born in Northern Ireland and growing up in Northern Ireland.
“But I think what we’re missing now is that we’re putting young players in a situation where they have to make a decision which is irreversible.”
CK Updates
F1 Q&A: Madring’s overtaking problem, virtual safety car operation and will there be any rookies in 2027?
The virtual safety car (VSC) definitely throws jeopardy into races, but it does not do virtually what the safety car does. Would it not be more balanced to have a minimum of at least one full lap? Yes, this would dampen the jeopardy effect but what happened to Lando Norris feels like a chance card in Monopoly. – Kyle
Lando Norris’ bad luck with the virtual safety car at the Spanish Grand Prix has certainly focused attention on the ways this can disrupt races.
The VSC has always had issues – it freezes a race rather than resets it, which can be a bit boring compared to an actual safety car – but it has the benefit of minimising disruption when a track hazard can be cleared relatively quickly.
It has long been an opportunity for someone to benefit over a rival, because making a pit stop under a VSC takes significantly less time than under racing conditions.
But usually this has been in cases where one team has changed or deployed its strategy with the express intention of waiting for a safety car or VSC (such as Norris himself in his maiden victory in Miami in 2024), and benefiting over a rival who has run a more conventional strategy.
That sort of thing is considered fair game. What happened to Norris – a driver lost a race win because his specific track positioning at the time of a VSC meant he alone was unable to pit under it – is, to the best anyone could remember on Sunday, unique.
The media are not privy to conversations in drivers’ briefings, and Norris in particular gets a bit sniffy when information from those meetings leaks out because they are meant to be a safe space where the drivers and FIA can share opinions without it becoming a controversy.
But it emerged after the race that this issue, as Norris put it, “has been spoken about many, many times”.
Whether Norris’ misfortune leads to a change, such as ensuring that a VSC is deployed for at least one whole lap, remains to be seen.
There is no easy answer, because within F1 it’s recognised that safety cars are part of the competitive jigsaw, and can be used to a team’s advantage. And the latest rules have been arrived at after various previous iterations that worked in different ways, such as shutting the pit lane for specific periods.
McLaren team principal Andrea Stella said: “Offering a personal opinion, I’m puzzled myself as to what’s right.
“Is it correct to give enough duration such that everyone will have been subject to the same track conditions? So, for instance, the virtual safety car lasts at least one full lap.
“Or you just keep it in the hands of the Gods, and sometimes you are lucky, sometimes you are not. I’m not sure.”
There is process for these sorts of discussions – they go to a sporting advisory committee for analysis, before being reviewed by the F1 Commission of teams, commercial rights holder F1 and governing body the FIA.
That won’t happen quickly – unless it is decided by F1 and the FIA that it is a desirable outcome to change the rules. Right now, the momentum for that does not appear to be there.
What are the prospects for rookies coming into Formula 1 next year? Many drivers are re-signing long contracts with their teams. Are there likely to be any new recruits? – Mia
The most likely place for a new driver to come into F1 next season is Haas, where Esteban Ocon’s position looks shaky.
The two main candidates there are Italy’s reigning Formula 2 champion Leonardo Fornaroli, who is part of McLaren’s driver development programme, and Brazilian Rafael Camara, who is second in F2 this year and part of the Ferrari driver academy.
Both have tested for Haas and are said to have impressed the team.
Haas will want a quick driver who brings money, and it’s not clear who the favourite is. Ryo Hirakawa, Haas’ reserve driver and a long-time protege of Haas’ technical partner Toyota, is also in the picture, but considered a less likely candidate.
Elsewhere, there is talk of Red Bull considering moving F2 championship leader Nikola Tsolov, who is Bulgarian, into their Racing Bulls team.
To do so, they would have to drop either Liam Lawson or Arvid Lindblad. It’s hard to see how it would be Lindblad, after such an impressive rookie campaign.
But Lawson has also been doing a good job this year, so it’s not a given.
At Cadillac, they have Indycar race-winner Colton Herta as reserve. They have been planning for Herta to be in F1 before too long – the idea behind him moving to Europe and doing Formula 2 this year was so he could learn the ropes on this side of the Atlantic and be as prepared as possible for graduation to F1.
But Herta has had a very difficult F2 campaign this year – his best result is a fifth place and he is 19th in the championship – so moving him up to F1 for 2027 would be a massive risk.
Ugo Ugochukwu, who won the Formula 3 title in Madrid on Sunday, is another American said to be of interest to Cadillac.
He had been part of the McLaren driver development programme for several years until they parted ways at the end of last season.
But even if Ugochukwu’s Cadillac links become formalised, next year is probably too early for him to make F1.
He’s also extremely tall – well over six foot and much taller even than Ocon, Alex Albon and George Russell, the current tallest drivers – so getting him into an F1 car would not be easy.
The other teams are pretty much locked down, although it’s still unknown whether Fernando Alonso is going to continue in F1 next year.
CK Updates
Leeds 4-1 Newcastle: Is ‘unplayable’ Calvert-Lewin in line for England recall?
No side will relish coming up against Calvert-Lewin and this aggressive Leeds outfit at Elland Road this season.
In fact, only Arsenal (52), Manchester City (50), Manchester United (45) and Bournemouth (37) have won more Premier League points in 2026 than Leeds United (35), with the Whites suffering just a single defeat across their past 13 league matches.
Yet Newcastle‘s implosion was remarkable as a young team were bullied and outfought.
Newcastle had previously made a good start under head coach Matthias Jaissle, following so much change in the summer, and were unbeaten in their opening five games in all competitions before this reality check.
But they have faced more shots than any other side in the Premier League.
However clinical Newcastle were in the opening weeks of the campaign, they mustered just eight efforts on target against Liverpool, Tottenham Hotspur and Bournemouth before their trip to Elland Road.
That was a dangerous cocktail going into this game.
What was most galling, though, was the visitors’ failure to match Leeds‘ bite at a raucous Elland Road.
Jaissle’s side crumbled and conceded three goals in a chastening 14-minute period in the first half.
It was a night the German manager swore in his post-match news conference to illustrate how low he felt.
“I don’t want to point fingers and point any players out tonight,” he said. “We were not matching as a team the level of intensity, the level of duel behaviours, the level of physicality.
“This is something we need to bring on the pitch in every match. This is non-negotiable. It should be the basic fundamentals of football.
“These are young lads. The learning curve needs to be fast.”
For Calvert-Lewin and Leeds, however, this was a night to remember.
-
CK Updates20 hours agoIrish Premiership: Who will replace Declan Devine as Glentoran manager?
-
CK Updates13 hours agoLeeds 4-1 Newcastle: Is ‘unplayable’ Calvert-Lewin in line for England recall?
-
CK Updates7 hours agoF1 Q&A: Madring’s overtaking problem, virtual safety car operation and will there be any rookies in 2027?

