The Psychology of Schadenfreude: A Red Card for Donald Trump
2026-07-08 During the U.S. team’s victory over Bosnia and Herzegovina, striker Folarin Balogun was shown a red card after a foul—and was suspended for the next game in accordance with FIFA rules. U.S. President Trump spoke by phone with FIFA President Gianni Infantino, and just a few hours later, FIFA lifted the red-card suspension. In the end, the Belgian team won the Round of 16 match by a landslide, 4–1. The schadenfreude online is just as pronounced. In an interview, Prof. Dr. Lea Boecker, assistant professor of psychology, explains why schadenfreude restores balance to our sense of justice.
Is the reaction to the final score of the U.S. vs. Belgium game a prime example of schadenfreude?
Yes, that’s a fair summary. Many had already sided with the Belgian team even before the game. This decision has a lot to do with a fundamental sense of justice: We want the world to be a fair place. Especially in sports, we expect the same rules to apply to everyone. When the red card was rescinded, many people got the impression that the balance of power had shifted. Consequently, there was a great deal of sympathy for Belgium. Now, the schadenfreude on social media is immense.
Your field of research is schadenfreude.
How did you feel after the game?
To be completely honest, I was also a little schadenfreude-filled about the result.
Why do people feel schadenfreude in the first place?
In my research, I examine four key emotions: schadenfreude, compassion, joy for others, and envy. Time and again, it becomes clear that people have a strong need for justice. When someone who has previously been disadvantaged succeeds, we tend to rejoice with them. We are less willing to grant success to individuals or groups we perceive as superior. Donald Trump is perceived as very dominant. His plan didn’t work out. The U.S. team lost despite the lifting of the red-card suspension. This outcome triggers schadenfreude in people and restores a desired sense of justice: the world is fair after all; not everything can be achieved through power and influence. The U.S. team’s athletic failure was perceived as a kind of symbolic balance.
So does schadenfreude also have a lot to do with morality?
Oh, yes. Another important factor is the sense of deservingness. When people feel that someone has gained an advantage unfairly or doesn’t deserve success, schadenfreude arises more easily.
Why is soccer, in particular, such an emotional sport?
There is rivalry, competition, and a clear winner-loser structure. Fans identify with their peers through jersey colors, flags, and national symbols, while at the same time clearly distinguishing themselves from the opponent. This sense of belonging significantly amplifies emotions like envy or schadenfreude.
Interestingly, small nations have kicked their way into the hearts of many fans during the group stage. Why do we especially root for underdogs to succeed?
Interestingly, there is no established term in German for the joy derived from others’ good fortune as a counterpart to schadenfreude. In my research, I therefore use the term “shared joy” (Mitfreude). We often find the smaller teams likable because we perceive them as disadvantaged. It’s easier for us to identify with an underdog, and we’re more likely to feel sympathy when these teams lose.
So was it actually impossible for the U.S. team to win?
Yes, you could look at it that way: If the American team had won, Trump’s political interference would have been back in the spotlight, and sports in the U.S. might have suffered lasting damage. Well, the Americans’ defeat was followed by ridicule and schadenfreude. So the U.S. lost twice—on the soccer field and morally.
Thank you very much for the interview!