England coach Thomas Tuchel says there is total confusion over the disciplinary process at the World Cup after the Balogun decision.
With Jarell Quansah sent off in England’s 3-2 win over Mexico, Tuchel was asked if he would be petitioning Fifa to get the defender’s ban cancelled before Saturday’s quarter-final against Norway (22:00 BST).
“Where does this start and where does this end now?” Tuchel said. “Can we overturn it or not overturn it? What’s going on?
“Where to draw the line is the question that I ask. I have no answer to that.
“Do we appeal if a yellow card is not a yellow card? Do we think it is not a red card or who thinks it? Where does this start and where does this end? It’s my question. I don’t have an answer.”
Both Balogun and Quansah were sent off following a video assistant referee (VAR) review.
Tuchel believes that the intervention has created uncertainty over the rules.
“I think first of all, to be very clear, that it [Balogun] was not a red card,” Tuchel said.
“But VAR got involved and obviously three people from VAR and the referee checked it were then of the opinion that it was a red card, so the decision is made.
“Who overturns this decision and when and on what grounds? And how far does this go now? It’s just strange for me. We just want to have consistency in the decisions.
“So, is our yellow card after the first minute against Declan Rice… we can now debate endlessly. I think it is not a yellow card. Do we get this back?
“Does France get the yellow card back for [Michael] Olise which was not a yellow card? Where does this end? Where does it stop?
“I don’t know the rules. I am the wrong person to ask. I will wait and see what’s coming.”
Speaking at a news conference on Sunday, Belgium head coach Rudi Garcia, 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.”
The Belgian FA said that Fifa has “refused to respond to the RBFA’s legitimate requests” for information.
The RBFA had requested a copy of the decision, an explanation of the process that had been followed and the applicable regulations.
Fifa responded to the correspondence by saying it considered it to constitute an appeal, appointed a judge and gave the RBFA just a few hours’ notice.
For an appeal to be admissible, the written reasons must first have been communicated. Yet the Belgian FA has not received this.
“While the RBFA was merely seeking legitimate explanations, Fifa itself created an appeal and immediately ensured that it would be declared inadmissible,” the statement read.
It added: “The RBFA is deeply concerned by the course of events and will continue to fight in the coming hours, days and months in defence of the fundamental principles of ethics, fair competition, and the interests of football as a whole.”
If Fifa stands by its decision, the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) has set up an ad hoc division, external to hear swift and independent resolution of appeals against decisions at the tournament.
