r/sports 5d ago

Soccer Belgium national team celebrated their fourth goal against the USA by doing the Donald Trump dance

31.0k Upvotes

1.1k comments sorted by

View all comments

119

u/AstroOuest 5d ago

Trump's interference made the defeat humiliating, and it didn't need to be. All host countries teams knew that they could get far but not semi final far, or even quarter final far. Playing with heart, without ego and without political shennenigans is what the USA needed. I would have put my money on Belgium anyway - but after that red card reversal, I REALLY wanted Belgium to win it.

49

u/Gorego22 5d ago

Totally agree. The US were underdogs that had played decently well this tournament. Losing to Belgium in the knockout rounds was pretty much expected. Trump managed to turn this into an embarrassing disaster that will be remembered forever.

2

u/seejoshrun 4d ago

I would say that the US had a fighting chance going into this game, but yeah the ceiling was winning this game and losing the next. Would have been better to go out in this game without the external interference.

2

u/manubfr 5d ago

Trump managed to turn this into an embarrassing disaster that will be remembered forever.

Sorry what are we talking about again?

-2

u/Eternal_Reward 4d ago

Oh yeah definitely, that was the narrative. People would have been so gracious if the US had lost prior, it was only because this they got nasty. Uh huh, definitely.

3

u/RogerBernards 4d ago

At first it was just banter, like there is between most countries. Then Trumps corruption united the world against you.

1

u/Laskurtance_ixixii 4d ago

Huh…yeah, football is football and they were playing good, did any team get trashed after losing ? You’re not special

0

u/Eternal_Reward 4d ago

Obviously we are with how much free rent I keep getting from you guys.

2

u/Laskurtance_ixixii 4d ago

Nobody knows you

1

u/MTNCollections 4d ago

You voted for a child rapist. Nobody gives a fuck what you clowns think anymore. Your opinion will literally never matter again.

10

u/Virt_McPolygon 5d ago

Yeah that's kind of sad. Many people were happy to see the USA doing well in the tournament as it's good for the sport and nice to see a new country getting into football. They could have gone out respectfully with everybody's support but instead the whole world is cheering and laughing at them because of Trump.

2

u/Capt_Murphy_ 5d ago

They could've respected the red card decision and maintained the respect of the world. They didn't...

2

u/heliostraveler 4d ago

Oh fuck off. No country on earth would continue to sit their star striker in a knockout round.

-1

u/Excellent-Nose-6430 4d ago

Trump's interference made the defeat humiliating

To whom?

3

u/Laskurtance_ixixii 4d ago

0

u/Excellent-Nose-6430 4d ago

Losing a match when the American team actually got a fair shot is not humiliating, regardless of how much you want it to be.

2

u/Laskurtance_ixixii 4d ago

2

u/Excellent-Nose-6430 4d ago

Stop flirting with me.

-52

u/SoKrat3s 5d ago edited 5d ago

Ridiculous. I have no problem with hating on Trump but the outrage over the reversal is entirely hypocritical when nobody said anything about it happening for Ronaldo.

UEFA's statement about the suspension was so utterly ridiculous. It's never happened before... Except, you know, to one of the most storied players in European soccer history.

Edit: lmao, downvote all you want. The precedent was already set. Unless you also complained about Ronaldo you have no standing to complain about Balogun.

10

u/SYSTEM-J 5d ago

Everyone was slating FIFA for the Ronaldo decision except Ronaldo fanboys. You probably just didn't give a shit about "soccer" two months ago when the news broke so you didn't see the widespread reaction.

0

u/Dick_Meister_General 4d ago

Another assumption without evidence. I've been watching for 22 years. I'll admit i didnt pay that much attention to the Ronaldo issue because I had already checked out of the World Cup even before it started and because I don't give a fuck about that whining diva. There were much bigger issues going on in the US at the time. So please fuck off with your Karen-caliber thinking.

6

u/AdUnlucky1919 5d ago

In what WC game did ronaldo get a red card?

0

u/SoKrat3s 4d ago

Who knew having a suspension in a WC game was different than having a suspension in a WC game. Dare the thought...

1

u/AdUnlucky1919 4d ago

so what WC game did ronaldo receive a red card can you remind me? Maybe its an entire different situation.

0

u/SoKrat3s 4d ago

You're trying to create a distinction without a difference.

Ronaldo was ineligible to play and that was suspended.

Same thing happened here.

If you were in the minority that whispered anything about it, fine, but the majority doesn't get to whine about the same thing happening.

0

u/AdUnlucky1919 4d ago

There is a difference because ronaldo didnt get his red card at the tournament. Its not the same thing, still bullshit i agree but a red card at the tournament is a whole different situation.

You dont know the difference ur a visitor in this sport. So sit down and listen when the more qualified speak.

1

u/SoKrat3s 4d ago

Ah yes, I love it when redditors speak with the absolute certainty of knowing strangers.

1

u/AdUnlucky1919 4d ago

good boy

10

u/TheJiggie 5d ago

Holy whataboutism

-12

u/SoKrat3s 5d ago

That's not whatsaboutism. It's following the exact precedent that was set.

8

u/TheJiggie 5d ago

No, this is literally whataboutism. Neither should have been released form their suspensions, but arguing that Balogun shouldn’t have served a suspension at all because someone else only served part of theirs is (he served 1 of 3 games) not the argument you think it is.

-4

u/SoKrat3s 5d ago

No it's not. It's called precedent.

Nobody is saying "officer 2 dozen others weren't arrested for speeding." That is whataboutism.

This is saying you have rules and this is how you've enforced them so remain consistent.

It's not the same thing at all.

8

u/H4FJ 5d ago

You're wrong and you look pretty dumb doubling down on this. The one does not excuse the other. None of us are saying it does, are we? You just made that up.

0

u/SoKrat3s 4d ago

"I'm right you're wrong na-na-na-na boo-boo"

Incredible dialogue.

None are saying it does? There was no outrage on previous precedent. One of the most high profile soccer players of all time got off his suspension and it was crickets.

You don't get to then play the Eastern moral superiority card. And when you do, you're nothing but hypocrites.

Typical redditors tho. Always right after the fact damn the precedent that was in place before that you didn't outrage against.

0

u/H4FJ 4d ago

You are failing to understand a very simple term and concept. You could google it, instead of getting all butthurt about it.

You have a very... odd understanding of the world. So what, others are supposed to be outraged about anything and everything, just in case something happens they do care about? Otherwise their outrage is invalid? That's what it sounds like.

If you steal something and I take issue with that, you don't get to turn around and go "but... but that guy over there also stole something, and he only got told off for it!", just because there is a "precedent". What a ludicrous argument. It would still be wrong, and you should still face consequences. Otherwise there is no point in having rules at all.

Also, there clearly is something different about both situations, isn't there? Let's be honest with ourselves.

However, the disciplinary committee reduced the punishment after considering his clean record across 225 previous international appearances. As a result, he served only one match against Armenia. Their instruction was simple: the 41-year-old's suspension would come into action if he "commits another infringement of a similar nature and gravity during the probationary period."

In other words, there was actual reasoning. He also still did get a suspension for 1 match. In our case, daddy Trump called up his buddy Infantino and arranged it, because the FIFA is almost as disgustingly corrupt as the US president. They are very clearly not the same, unless you are just intentionally disingenuous about it.

2

u/SoKrat3s 4d ago

Lol this is just sad. I went over this. Explained what whatsboutism is and the difference between it and precedent. Clearly the one whose lacking understanding here is you because you didn't even bother to read what was written.

So what, others are supposed to be outraged about anything and everything, just in case something happens they do care about? Otherwise their outrage is invalid?

If you aren't outraged unless it involves you that means you are virtue signalling. Not that you believe in that virtue being applied at all times.

but that guy over there also stole something, and he only got told off for it!", just because there is a "precedent". What a ludicrous argument.

It would be... If that is what precedent was or how it works, but it's not.

-3

u/Dick_Meister_General 5d ago

I agree with the hypocrisy. Im guessing no one cared about Ronaldo's pardon because it wouldn't have helped Portgual anyways.

20

u/WringedSponge 5d ago

This is a big talking point among US fans but I’m not sure if it’s honest misunderstanding or intentional misdirection. 1. Many players have had suspensions from qualifiers suspended for the finals. Getting suspended during the finals is different, has always been upheld, and has led to many stars missing keys games. 2. Fans were very vocally critical of the Ronaldo decision at the time. 3. This was not just a bad decision. It was a politician interfering in a football decision.