It may be premature to fully evaluate the 2026 World Cup, especially with remnants of celebration still visible in New Jersey. A comprehensive assessment will only be possible once memories settle and the implications of various incidents become clearer. Nonetheless, an exploration of how this World Cup, concluded by Leandro Paredes tussling with Gavi, fits into football history is warranted.
The Balogun Affair could lead to significant ramifications. Currently, it seems the world has moved past it, a common occurrence in tournament settings that often overshadow other events with their own momentum. However, the decision to yield to political pressures and override 64 years of tradition to allow a specific player onto the field—mirroring Gianni Infantino’s prior actions with Cristiano Ronaldo and his manipulation of qualification rules for the Club World Cup to ensure Lionel Messi’s participation—marks a pivotal moment.
In the future, we may come to accept that high-profile players receive special treatment due to the prioritization of revenue over fairness and the sport’s integrity. The push for profit has been evident throughout the 2026 tournament. Alternatively, this moment could galvanize opposition against Infantino, as evidenced by the increasing criticism from British and some American politicians directed at FIFA and its president. One immediate outcome could be the expansion of the World Cup to 64 teams as Infantino seeks to bolster his support base, particularly after the damage to his claims as a champion of the global south due to U.S. and Canadian immigration policies.
Issues Beyond the Field
Several issues that have emerged during the tournament are likely to resurface. For instance, the treatment of Iran has been appalling and sets a troubling precedent. While ticket prices may be reduced for the 2030 World Cup, the notion that a fair share should be accessible to devoted fans who attend league matches regularly is now obsolete. The World Cup has transformed from a mass gathering into an exclusive event.
The true costs incurred by host cities will only become evident in hindsight, encompassing both financial and social implications. In the U.S. and Canada, there have been reports of homeless individuals being swept from the streets, with many deprived of their minimal possessions, identification, and medication. Meanwhile, in Mexico, concerns have been raised regarding water extraction and environmental degradation linked to World Cup initiatives.
Media Relations and Tournament Experience
In a recent double-page spread, the Italian publication la Gazzetta dello Sport labeled the World Cup a “disaster,” highlighting issues such as ticket pricing, the Balogun Affair, unfavorable weather conditions, an increase in matches, and insufficient rest periods for players. While this characterization might be exaggerated, the publication’s experience with its ticket allocation for the final being cut from five to two exemplifies a troubling trend. It remains uncertain whether these two events are connected, but the notion that a media outlet could face restrictions for not adhering to the official narrative—that this World Cup is the greatest ever—feels dystopian.
This incident aligns with FIFA’s generally dismissive stance towards the media during this tournament. Although some venues, particularly Houston and Atlanta, were notably accommodating, the overall organization and facilities were among the poorest seen in the last six World Cups. While one might argue that the functioning of wifi is not a priority for the average fan, it reflects a broader attitude: fans are viewed primarily as sources of revenue, while media coverage is seen as a necessary nuisance.
Final Reflections
The quality of football showcased was decent but not exceptional. Notable matches, such as Brazil versus Japan, Morocco against the Netherlands, and England facing Mexico, provided thrilling moments. However, most of these standout performances occurred in the earlier knockout stages. The quarter-finals lacked inspiration, with Argentina’s semi-final victory over England being an exhilarating match that included a dramatic collapse, while Spain’s win over France was rather one-sided.
The final itself was disappointing. Although the right team emerged victorious in a typically controlled manner, the lackluster display was a direct result of the leniency shown towards Argentina earlier in the tournament. The outcome inevitably influences the overall perception of the event, placing it behind the tournaments of 2022 and 2018, not to mention the memorable World Cups of the 1980s and 1998. Future evaluations will determine its exact standing, whether it surpasses or falls short of 2014 and 2006. While it was not remarkable, it was satisfactory, and beyond FIFA’s bravado, that may be sufficient.
- This extract is from Soccer Desk, a newsletter from the Guardian. Subscribe for free here.
