The uproar over the reversal of the suspension of U.S. forward Folarin Balogun at the North and Central American World Cup is spreading into a power struggle in international football. After UEFA publicly criticized FIFA, France's request to cancel Michael Olise's booking was also rejected, and dissatisfaction within European football is growing.

The starting point of the controversy was Balogun. The U.S. national team forward received a suspension after being sent off during a match, but FIFA effectively overturned it during the tournament, allowing him to play in the round of 16 against Belgium. It was an unusual decision to let a player with a finalized suspension take the field again in the middle of the knockout stage.

The controversy grew after it became known that U.S. President Donald Trump had intervened. President Trump stated publicly that he asked FIFA President Gianni Infantino to review the Balogun case. Regardless of the procedures behind the final decision by FIFA, the fact that the president of the host nation directly raised a specific disciplinary matter with the FIFA president in itself sparked controversy over political power interfering in sports.

UEFA reacted immediately. It described the decision by FIFA as “incomprehensible and indefensible” and criticized that it had “crossed a red line.” On top of this came France and the Olise matter. Olise received a booking after colliding with Matias Galarza in the round of 16 against Paraguay. Galarza fell clutching his face, but the broadcast view suggested Olise had grabbed the opponent jersey rather than his face. The French Football Federation (FFF) requested that the booking be canceled. Since FIFA had even overturned Balogun's suspension, the FFF reasoned that a booking with a clear possibility of error could also be reviewed. However, FIFA rejected the request. On the 8th, France coach Didier Deschamps stated, “We received the decision from FIFA this morning. Olise's booking will be maintained.” Consequently, if Olise is booked again in the quarterfinal against Morocco, he will be ineligible even if the team reaches the semifinals.

The two cases are amplifying accusations of double standards by FIFA in Europe. The suspension of a U.S. player was lifted during the tournament, while the booking for a French player was left in place. Although the severity of the sanctions and the nature of the incidents differ, suspicion has not easily subsided because, just before the Balogun case, President Trump requested a review from President Infantino.

This clash is not merely a dispute over officiating. FIFA and UEFA have long been at odds over money and authority in world football.

President Infantino is pushing to expand the Club World Cup. A plan has even been mentioned to increase the tournament, which was held in the United States last year with 32 teams, to 48 teams in 2029. For UEFA, this is unwelcome. The rift between the two organizations surfaced as well at the FIFA Congress in Paraguay last May. When Infantino arrived late to the congress due to a Middle East itinerary attended by President Trump and Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, President Ceferin and other European delegates left the hall.

FIFA is structured so that its 211 member associations each basically have one vote. Regardless of the size of the football industry, England has one vote, Germany has one vote, and individual member countries in Asia and Africa also have one vote. In terms of member count alone, UEFA has 55 associations. The Confederation of African Football (CAF) has 54, and the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) has 47. Combined, the two continents account for 101 votes. Adding the members of the Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF) and the Oceania Football Confederation (OFC), votes outside Europe are overwhelming. This is the backdrop for why President Infantino is not easily swayed despite strong criticism from Europe.

President Infantino has devoted effort to broadening ties with countries in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, and North and Central America. He increased the number of World Cup participants from 32 to 48 and expanded the Club World Cup as well. In Europe, there has been criticism about fixture congestion and commercialism, but for non-European countries seeking more World Cup berths and greater FIFA support, these moves have carried a different meaning. The power base of President Infantino is not about to be shaken. Even if Europe mounts a strong backlash, the FIFA presidential election is not decided by Europe alone. Support from non-European members, including Asia and Africa, can be even more important.