The background to FIFA’s ban on wearing the “One Love” captain’s ribbon remains opaque. As the world football association explained following an initial silence, the national associations have not submitted the necessary application. There had been all sorts of “requests” on the subject, but the associations had not submitted the “clear application” required for any permission, FIFA explained to the “Süddeutsche Zeitung”.
Due to the lack of an application, FIFA was able to “happily” let the septet from Europe run into the knife shortly before the start of the World Cup, the newspaper explained. In any case, the seven associations involved in the cause – from England, Germany, Wales, Denmark, Belgium, Switzerland and the Netherlands – refrained from the campaign with the ribbon, which was intended as a message for diversity and tolerance because of the impending sporting disadvantages.
“With a specific application, they might have put FIFA in a quandary months ago. Simply submit the bandage, as required, with the rest of the player’s uniform for approval – and wait to see what FIFA does,” wrote the “Süddeutsche Zeitung”. “With a ban, however, FIFA would have gotten the buck, they would have been in the media’s need for explanations for weeks and months – the seven would have achieved more with that than with stray symbolism.”
Pressure exerted by FIFA unclear
The story of the alleged pressure exerted by the world association also remains unclear. Shortly before the start of the World Cup, FIFA had banned the wearing of the colorful ribbon with reference to the equipment regulations. As a punishment, the captains would each have received a yellow card. However, some European associations had reported being “massively pressured” by FIFA.
The president of the Swiss association, Dominique Blanc, later stated that FIFA had not threatened any further sanctions apart from the yellow card. Adrian Arnold, the Swiss head of communications, in turn explained: “It was said very clearly that there would be a yellow card or even stricter sanctions.” So it remains opaque.
