FA Chief Mark Bullingham has explained why England took the decision not to wear the OneLove armband against Iran following a meeting with FIFA hours before kick-off.
The FA announced before England's opening World Cup fixture against Iran, along with six other European nations due to wear the OneLove armband at the 2022 Qatar World Cup, that Kane would not wear the armband. The decision came after the threat of captains receiving a yellow card for wearing the armband was upheld by FIFA.
Harry Kane revealed after the win against Iran that he wanted to wear the armband but was advised against doing so. In a statement from the joint football associations, it was confirmed before the Three Lions' 6-2 win against Iran in a statement which read: "FIFA has been very clear that it will impose sporting sanctions if our captains wear the armbands on the field of play."
READ MORE: 'Spineless' - England supporters slam FA World Cup decision after FIFA OneLove armband threat
Speaking to ITV ahead of England's clash against the USA, Bullingham explained the FA's decision and outlined what happened before the match against Iran. The FA chief said: "It’s important to know what happened here, we have been very clear that we wanted to wear it and were committed.
"On Saturday before the game, we thought we reached an understanding where we would wear it, we hadn’t had permission but we then faced a fine if we wore it. Unfortunately, on the day of the game they give us 10 minutes notice, two hours before the game, they came here [England’s base in Qatar] with five officials and ran us through scenario where anyone wearing the armband would be booked and would face disciplinary action on top of that."
Bullingham hinted that the punishment for wearing the armband would have been 'unlimited', meaning it was a risk the FA could not take. The FA Chief continued: "It was unlimited [the punishment], they would take disciplinary action against any player who was wearing an armband on top of wearing an armband.
"[Could’ve been banned for further games?] That is correct. [Further than that? Point deduction?] It’s not clear, they said they would take disciplinary action effectively in that action.
"The way they [FIFA] acted was completely unprecedented. All I can say is the level of feeling is very high, we’re upset, we’re angry, we thought it was outrageous how this was handled."
Ian Wright was just one of many pundits to speak out and slam the FA's decision for not wearing the OneLove armband in support of the LGBTQ+ community.
Bullingham responded: "I understand that, we felt like we couldn’t put the players in a position were the World Cup, something they’d dreamt about when they were young, suddenly they might face a ban and that’s not a scenario we could put them in.
"I do think that any bidding [World Cup bid] criteria, you have to have a level of basic human rights and that’s part of the discussion that has to be had. I think that has to be had at the point when countries who bid for the World Cup, not in the build up to it.
"I understand the hurt that the communities are feeling and that’s the last thing we wanted to do, we want to show support for these communities. We feel incredibly frustrated that we haven’t managed to do so."
FIFA released the following statement regarding the OneLove armband debate. "FIFA is an inclusive organisation that wants to put football to the benefit of society by supporting good and legitimate causes, but it has to be done within the framework of the competition regulations which are known to everyone," it read.
READ NEXT:
Win £150 of Nike vouchers by predicting World Cup Golden Boot winner
Bukayo Saka and Jack Grealish troll each other on Instagram amid England's World Cup win vs Iran
Lisandro Martinez call mocked by Man Utd as Spurs' Cristian Romero embarrassed vs Saudi Arabia
Graeme Souness and Roy Keane in heated World Cup row on ITV over divisive new FIFA directive
England player ratings vs Iran: Saka and Bellingham impress as England romp to 6-2 World Cup win
