FIFA bans Burgundy Cross at Spain-France match in Dallas

FIFA bans the Burgundy Cross at the France-Spain match in Dallas: censorship or ignorance?

Last Tuesday, during the France-Spain match at Dallas's AT&T Stadium, Spanish fans ran into a list of flags banned by FIFA. Among them, the Burgundy Cross, the emblem of the Spanish tercios that conquered and defended territories now part of the United States, and the Sacred Heart flag. The decision has sparked a debate over the organization's criteria for deeming a symbol "political" or "offensive."

A ban that revives a historical controversy

FIFA, which presents itself as a guarantor of neutrality, banned these flags while others, such as the ikurriña or the flag of the Spanish Republic, did not appear on the list. The paradox is that the Burgundy Cross is part of the official flags of the states of Alabama and Florida, and of numerous US municipalities. "That FIFA bans in Texas what flies in the capital of Alabama is something else," the analyses conclude.

Interpretations of the ban differ. One line of thought points directly at the Spanish government: "The Spanish federation, controlled by the PSOE, would have pressured to remove symbols it considers undemocratic." Another, more conspiratorial one, points to FIFA itself as a "nest of anti-Spanish Freemasons." But there are also those who attribute it to ignorance: "In the US they can't tell the Burgundy Cross apart from a Confederate flag, and they've lumped them together."

The detail that doesn't add up

The stadium's official guide allows flags up to 2x1.5 meters if they are fire-resistant and pass inspection, but bans any "political, offensive or discriminatory" material. The sheet of examples circulating at the match included the Burgundy Cross and a version with caravels. The key detail: the same Cross of St Andrew that the tercios carried to America in the 16th century is still an official symbol in several southern US states today. In its zeal to avoid offense, FIFA has ended up banning an icon that the host country itself considers part of its heritage.

With this decision, the organization shows that its concept of political neutrality is selective, and that historical ignorance sometimes trumps common sense. What looks like a minor measure may have economic consequences: fan discontent and a further loss of credibility for an already questioned body.