Belgium Holds the Key to Infantino's Term: The Balogun Case and FIFA's Transparency Problem

On September 7, 2026, the Royal Belgian Football Association (RBFA) issued a statement that shook the international football community: they would not support Gianni Infantino's re-election as FIFA President unless the organization provided satisfactory explanations for the red card incident involving Folarin Balogun at the 2026 World Cup and ensured transparency in the decisions of the FIFA Forward Enterprise fund. This is not merely a diplomatic threat; it is a major crack in the wall of FIFA's power, an organization accustomed to silence and compliance. I followed the 2026 World Cup from the early days, and the Balogun story reminded me of my own words: "There are World Cup nights when I understand that football does not belong to the winning team." Because behind every decision on the pitch, there is an entire power system at play, and when that system lacks transparency, football becomes the victim. The incident began with a controversial play: Balogun, a player for the US national team, was shown a red card by the referee during a group-stage match. According to the rules, a red card means an automatic one-match suspension. But FIFA, in a rare decision, suspended that ban, allowing Balogun to play in the subsequent match against Belgium. This decision came without any public explanation. Belgium, which lost that match, felt insulted. They asked: why would a disciplinary decision be interfered with so secretly? RBFA did not stop at questioning. They demanded that the Balogun case be placed on the agenda of the FIFA Council meeting on October 15, 2026. They also criticized the lack of justification for the expenditures of FIFA Forward Enterprise, the global football development fund. RBFA President Pascale Van Damme stated that two months after the World Cup, there were still no answers to fundamental questions. "We need a strong, independent, and sustainable model for international football," he said, implicitly pointing out that the current model lacks all three of those elements. This is a rare moment when a national association dares to publicly challenge FIFA's authority. For decades, FIFA has been seen as an impregnable fortress, where decisions are made behind closed doors and no one dares to question them. Belgium has broken that silence. They are not only questioning the Balogun case but also the entire system of global football governance. From a data perspective, this incident has a clear logic. Belgium is one of the richest and most influential associations in Europe. They have close ties with UEFA, and they are using that weight to pressure FIFA. Their public condition for supporting Infantino's re-election is a calculated strategic move. They know that Infantino needs the support of member associations to be re-elected, and they are using their vote as a bargaining chip. But this is not just a political power play. This is a crisis of trust. When FIFA makes a disciplinary decision without explanation, they set a dangerous precedent. If one association can be treated unfairly without justification, then all other associations could become the next victims. Belgium is fighting for the principle of transparency, and that is a just fight. I recall my own story in 2026, when I was dismissed as "a woman who knows nothing about tactics" simply because I wrote about a young player no one noticed. I understood that the silence of the system is often the biggest enemy of truth. When I wrote "France won, but football lost" after the 2026 World Cup, I was also criticized, but I had data to defend myself. Belgium is doing the same thing: they have evidence, they have arguments, and they are not afraid to confront. So what will happen next? The FIFA Council meeting on October 15 will be the decisive moment. If FIFA provides a clear, transparent explanation about the Balogun case and about FIFA Forward Enterprise, Belgium may withdraw its condition. But if FIFA continues to remain silent, Belgium will maintain its stance, and it is very likely that other associations will follow suit. This would seriously weaken Infantino's position before the election. I believe this is an opportunity for world football to change. Not just to resolve a red card case, but to build a more transparent, more accountable governance system. "Tactics will become obsolete, but the story of trust will not," I wrote in a previous analysis. And trust in FIFA is being tested. Belgium is not only fighting for a fair decision; they are fighting for a sustainable future of football. In the silence of FIFA's offices in Zurich, I imagine the data whispering. The numbers about FIFA Forward Enterprise funds, disciplinary reports, phone calls between officials. All are waiting for an answer. And if the answer does not come, it will be a clear signal that FIFA is not ready to change. Belgium has asked a big question, and the world is watching to see how FIFA will respond. For me, this is a lesson about the power of patience and investigation. When I wrote the investigative piece about the failed transfer of Nha Trang Club, I spent months verifying information. But in the end, the truth was exposed. Belgium is doing the same thing at the global level. They are not rushing, they are not judging, they are just asking questions and waiting for answers. And if the answers do not come, they will act. I do not know for sure what will happen on October 15. But I know that world football is at an important crossroads. Will FIFA continue to live in the shadows, or will it step into the light? The answer lies in the hands of Infantino and FIFA officials. But one thing is certain: Belgium has planted a seed, and that seed may blossom into a revolution in football governance.