Many feared a US World Cup under Trump would be a disaster. Its legacy will prove otherwise
- Written by: Weekend Times
The 2026 FIFA World Cup has been a raging success, judging by the numbers, the atmosphere and the absence of any major security incident.
It’s ironic, then, that officials from the
powerful European nations are pushing for FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s resignation despite him pulling off one of the globe’s great spectacles.
This 39-day celebration of soccer took place despite myriad geopolitical fears, border disputes, and visa crises blighting the tournament’s buildup.
Read more: Spain completely dominates Argentina in one-sided World Cup final
There were a few major scandals
There were controversies, as you’d expect.
Three months before the event began, the United States – staging 78 of the 104 matches – started a war with one of the competing nations: Iran. One can only imagine the frantic negotiations behind closed doors that enabled Iran to play all three of its group games on US soil.
The president of Iran’s football federation, Mehdi Taj, requested FIFA relocate the team’s home base from Arizona to Tijuana, Mexico, just across the border. This allowed Taj and other officials – banned from entering the US because of their allegiance to the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (listed as a terrorist organisation in countries such as the US, Canada and Australia) – to stay with the team as it prepared for matches.
Many were later shocked when FIFA-selected Somali referee Omar Artan was banned from entering the US.
However, there were eight other referees from nations on the US’s list of banned and semi-banned countries. All were admitted.
Teams that were allowed to compete in the US despite a full ban were Iran and Haiti, while partial ban countries Senegal and Côte d’Ivoire were also able to compete in the US.
The biggest and most damaging controversy though was the Donald Trump-Gianni Infantino red card affair, when FIFA’s disciplinary committee suspended a one-match ban for the US’s Folarin Balogun following the US president’s call to the FIFA boss.
Both presidents admitted to the call, but a statement from Infantino trying to limit the damage and another from the disciplinary committee justifying the suspension seemed only to fan the flames of discontent.
It prompted London-based sport and human rights organisation FairSquare to lodge an ethics complaint with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) against Infantino. It stated:
the complaint alleges Infantino has repeatedly breached IOC rules on political neutrality by offering his political support for US President, Donald Trump.
A core group of European nations and Western media see the red card affair as another example of the FIFA president cosying up to autocratic leaders, including those democratically elected. But reports alleging “the world” is calling for Infantino’s head are grossly exaggerated. It is a media and politics story – most fans are talking about the the on-field action.
That didn’t stop many fans at the final booing Trump and Infantino before and after the decider between Spain and Argentina in New Jersey.
The politics and governance of FIFA will play out in the months ahead – Infantino’s ambition is to seek a fourth term, with an election in 2027. The next eight months will be an intense period of lobbying, with many of European soccer’s 55 members hoping to elicit support from other confederations to vote Infantino out.
FIFA, though, is made up of 211 member nations, many of whom are very happy with the increase in FIFA profits distributed to national federations, in turn allowing them to further invest in the game.
Read more: Can you be a World Cup ‘winner’ without winning the World Cup?
Cabo Verde, one of the highlights of the expanded World Cup format, is a case in point. FIFA money helped construct new pitches in 2022, as well as a refurbishment of its elite academy.
There were also forecasts of US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents patrolling venues, scaring away other fans; that too did not materialise.
Perhaps the biggest concern of all was the risk to security and yet, publicly at least, there were no major incidents.
The good news stories
The media’s predictions of empty stadiums and “real fans” being priced out of the market proved to be way off the mark.
Even before the semi-finals, FIFA reported more than six and a half million fans had packed venues, surpassing the past two editions of the World Cup combined, for an average occupancy of 99.7%.
It is the numbers that speak of success – the numbers attract sponsors, pushing up broadcast rights for future editions, growing the pie from which every member federation eats.
Record television audiences in several markets will contribute to what is expected to be a new overall record for global audiences once the final numbers are compiled.
It has silenced many critics, mostly from Europe, who believed the talent across the globe did not warrant a tournament expansion from 32 to 48 nations.
But several “minnow nations” acquitted themselves well, and teams from Africa shone, with nine of its ten qualified nations moving beyond the group stage and into the knockouts.
The on-field legacy
Western media coverage may continue to portray the Trump-Infantino red card affair as the dominant memory of the World Cup.
The ordinary person, who tuned in at all hours of the day or night to see their team play, will disagree.
For them, it will be the extraordinary moments of athletic skill on show as their team provided moments of national joy and despair on a global stage which came and went all too quickly.
Politics often overshadows sport – until the ball is kicked. This World Cup proved to be no different.
Tracey Holmes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
