In the logic of FIFA, the World Cup was a success, but football lost

The FIFA World Cup, held in Mexico, Canada, and the United States, was declared a resounding success by the world football governing body. According to reports, the tournament generated record revenues, with estimates placing the total earnings at around $15 billion. This figure includes proceeds from television rights, ticket sales, and secondary market transactions. The expanded format featuring 48 teams instead of the traditional 32 did not lead to a perceived dilution of quality, as underdog nations such as Cape Verde and the Democratic Republic of the Congo delivered compelling performances. Star players like Lionel Messi and Kylian Mbappé also contributed to the spectacle, aligning with FIFA’s vision of a high-profile event. Despite these financial gains, the tournament raised concerns about the erosion of core sporting values. One notable issue was the exclusion of fans from certain regions due to U.S. immigration policies. Somali referee Omar Artan, who had a valid visa, was turned away at Miami airport. Similarly, many African and Asian fans faced difficulties entering the country. Iranian players, required to travel from Mexico to the U.S., competed under challenging conditions. These incidents highlighted the growing disconnect between the global nature of football and the restrictive policies imposed by host countries, undermining the spirit of international unity. FIFA President Gianni Infantino appeared satisfied with the outcome, celebrating the tournament as a triumph. However, the event also saw direct political interference. A call from former U.S. President Donald Trump to Infantino led to the lifting of a red card against U.S. striker Falorin Balogun, sparking widespread criticism. This decision was viewed as a blatant breach of sports integrity, raising questions about the influence of powerful figures on the outcomes of matches. Such actions have long been a point of contention, particularly given FIFA's history of close ties with wealthy nations like Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The commercialization of the tournament reached new heights, with elements borrowed from American sports culture. Three-minute breaks during matches, even in climate-controlled stadiums, were used as disguised advertising opportunities. The structure of games was altered to include four quarters rather than two halves, mirroring American football traditions. High-profile celebrities in VIP lounges became prominent features on television screens, while ordinary spectators faced steep costs to attend matches. The final match featured an extended halftime show and the presentation of championship rings, reminiscent of practices in the National Football League. These changes reflected a broader trend of Americanizing the World Cup, with FIFA increasingly adopting formats and strategies favored by U.S. audiences. While the tournament showcased thrilling matches and dramatic moments, the emphasis on entertainment over competition raised alarms among critics. The shift towards a more commercially driven model has sparked debates about the future direction of international football. With the next World Cup set to take place in 2030, discussions will likely continue regarding how to balance profitability with the preservation of the game’s integrity.