比利時已提上訴、但不保證賽前會有結果
02年韓國的荒謬裁判 被黑到現在
這次荒謬程度應該算超過那時候了
美國是打算被黑一輩子嗎
FIFA自己都對政治干涉足球的事情有嚴格規定
就拿今年尼泊爾足協被FIFA全球禁賽的事情來說
也是因為尼泊爾政治干涉足協事務被FIFA禁賽
結果這次FIFA自己就違反這規定
因為川普一個電話 英凡提諾就可以啟動什麼委員會 改判延緩一年執行...
Belgium has appealed against FIFA’s decision to suspend the one-game ban handed to Folarin Balogun, less than 24 hours out from the team’s World Cup round-of-16 game against the United States.
比利時已對FIFA的決定提出上訴，該決定原本是對Folarin Balogun做出的一場禁賽處分，但距離對陣美國隊的世界盃16強比賽不到24小時，這項禁賽卻被暫時撤銷
In a statement — released Monday, after The Athletic exclusively revealed that Belgium had the right to appeal the decision — the Royal Belgian Football Assoc iation (RBFA) confirmed it had “no alternative but to challenge (Balogun’s) el igibility for the upcoming match”.
在週一發布的聲明中（此前《The Athletic》獨家披露比利時有權上訴），比利時足協表示，他們「別無選擇，只能挑戰（Balogun）在即將到來比賽中的出場資格」
The RBFA said it had learned of the change in Balogun’s circumstances through m edia reports and written to FIFA to request a full explanation of “the process” and “applicable regulations”.
比利時足協表示，他們是透過媒體報導才得知Folarin Balogun情況的變動，並已致函FIFA，要求完整說明「程序」與「適用規則」
“As its only response, FIFA sent a letter to the RBFA stating that it considere d this correspondence to constitute an appeal that a judge had been appointed, and that the RBFA had only a few hours to complete that appeal. No information w hatsoever was provided by FIFA,” the RBFA statement continued.
RBFA聲明續稱：「FIFA唯一的回應，是來信表示將此視為上訴，並已指派法官，且RBFA僅剩數小時完成上訴，但FIFA未提供任何資訊」
“For an appeal to be admissible, FIFA’s own regulations state that the reasone d decision must first have been communicated to the appellant. While the RBFA wa s merely seeking legitimate explanations, FIFA itself created an appeal and imme diately ensured that it would be declared inadmissible.”
「依FIFA規定，上訴成立前必須先向申訴方提供具理由的決定，但RBFA只是要求合理解釋，FIFA卻自行將其視為上訴，並使其立即可能被判定不成立」
“All of this occurred while FIFA simultaneously refused to respond to the RBFA’s legitimate requests … To be clear, as of this moment, the RBFA has still no t received any decision or any explanation from FIFA regarding this matter. It t herefore has no alternative but to challenge the player’s eligibility for the u pcoming match.”
「在這一切發生同時，FIFA也拒絕回應RBFA的合理請求……截至目前，RBFA仍未收到任何決定或解釋，因此別無選擇，只能挑戰該球員的出賽資格」
Sources briefed on the matter, speaking anonymously to protect relationships, ha ve now told The Athletic that both U.S. Soccer and the Belgian federation were a sked to make submissions by 5am PST on Monday morning, which has exasperated the Belgians who have not received the decision by FIFA to review, as it is not mad e public.
知情人士匿名向《The Athletic》表示，美國足球協會與比利時足協都被要求在週一清晨5點（太平洋時間）前提交文件，但比利時方面尚未收到FIFA的公開審查決定，對此感到相當不滿
A member of the FIFA appeals committee — who does not represent a federation in either UEFA or CONCACAF — has been selected to hear the case.
一名FIFA Appeals Committee成員已被指定審理此案，且該成員不代表UEFA或CONCACAF任何協會，以避免利益衝突
Submissions must now be made by Monday morning, with a ruling possible before th e game, but Belgium have not been provided with any guarantees by FIFA that this will be the case.
相關文件必須在週一上午前提交，裁決有可能在比賽前出爐，但FIFA並未向比利時保證一定會在賽前完成判決
It would be extraordinary at this stage if FIFA were to change their position fo r a second time, with Balogun under a one game ban between Wednesday night until Sunday morning, until FIFA suddenly suspended the one-match ban. It is unclear whether the appeal is merely procedural or if it has a genuine chance of moving the goalposts once more ahead of a huge knockout game at a World Cup.
在此階段若FIFA再次改變立場將極不尋常，Folarin Balogun原本自週三晚至週日早晨處於禁賽狀態，但FIFA突然暫停禁賽，目前仍不清楚這次上訴只是程序性，還是可能再次改變規則，影響世界盃淘汰賽
The Athletic had already reported that Belgium has requested the full rationale behind the decision to lift Balogun’s suspension, as well as the report from FI FA’s refereeing body. FIFA’s disciplinary committee can decide against sharing its rationale.
《The Athletic》先前報導，比利時要求FIFA提供解除禁賽的完整理由與裁判委員會報告，但FIFA紀律委員會可以選擇不公開理由
The RBFA also alleged that FIFA “deliberately removed the section concerning th e automatic suspension of players from its (pre-match) presentation” and said i t had “questioned FIFA, both orally and in writing, about the reasons for this change, yet once again received no response”.
RBFA還指控FIFA「刻意從賽前簡報中移除了關於球員自動停賽的部分」，並表示已口頭與書面詢問原因，但再次沒有得到回應
Belgium’s statement concluded: “Regardless of the sporting outcome of this mat ch, the RBFA is deeply concerned by the course of events and will continue to fi ght in the coming hours, days and months in defence of the fundamental principle s of ethics, fair competition, and the interests of football as a whole.”比利時聲明最後表示：「無論比賽結果如何，RBFA對此事件的發展深感憂慮，並將在接下來的數小時、數天與數月持續為足球的倫理、公平競爭與整體利益而戰」
--