Will the 2026 Football World Cup be the worst in history?
- Dean Weiss
- Dec 21, 2025
- 6 min read
The 2026 Football World Cup will be the first to be hosted by three countries: the United States, Canada, and Mexico. While this joint hosting promises a unique and expansive tournament, it also brings several significant challenges. From the vast distances between stadiums and extreme June heat to the risk of natural disasters and strained political relations, the event faces hurdles that could affect players, fans, and the global footprint of the tournament. This analysis explores these issues and their potential impact on the world's most-watched sporting event.
The Challenge of Vast Distances Between Stadiums
The 2026 World Cup is notable for its vast host countries. The U.S. covers over 3.8 million square miles, with stadiums across various states. Including venues in Canada and Mexico further expands the geographic reach. This vast distance means teams and fans will face long travel times between matches. For players, frequent long flights can cause fatigue and disrupt preparation routines. For fans, especially international visitors, moving between cities could be costly and time-consuming. Unlike previous tournaments in compact countries, the 2026 World Cup will require careful planning to prevent exhaustion and logistical issues.
The tournament schedule should have considered these distances to minimise travel strain and environmental harm. However, the reality is that some teams will face multiple cross-country trips. This factor could influence match outcomes and player performance, adding an unpredictable element to the competition.
Extreme Heat and Its Impact on Players
The 2026 World Cup will take place in June and July, months known for high temperatures in many parts of the United States and Mexico. Some host cities, such as Dallas, Houston, and Mexico City, regularly experience temperatures above 32°C during this period. Playing football at such high temperatures poses risks to player health and performance. Heat exhaustion, dehydration, and reduced stamina are real concerns. While stadiums may have cooling technologies and hydration protocols, the physical toll on players remains significant.
Canada’s northern venues may offer cooler conditions, but the majority of matches will be in hotter climates. This uneven temperature distribution could affect fairness and player safety. Teams unaccustomed to extreme heat might struggle more, potentially impacting the quality of play.
Natural Disasters and Their Potential Disruption
The United States faces natural disasters like hurricanes, wildfires, tornadoes, and floods, while Mexico is at risk from earthquakes and tropical storms. These events could disrupt the tournament by causing:
Match postponements or relocations due to unsafe conditions
Damage to stadium infrastructure needing emergency repairs
Travel delays for teams and fans
Safety concerns for attendees and communities
For instance, hurricanes in the Gulf Coast and southern states during June and July might necessitate last-minute schedule or venue changes. Wildfires in western states like California could affect air quality and visibility. Organisers need strong contingency plans, including insurance, emergency response teams, and flexible scheduling, to minimise disruptions. Let's hope that natural disasters will not put the tournaments smooth running at risk.
Strained Relations Between Host Countries
The 2026 World Cup is uniquely hosted by the USA, Canada, and Mexico, countries with complex political and social ties. While they cooperate on many fronts, tensions over immigration, trade tariffs, and border security could subtly impact the tournament:
Visa and travel restrictions may lead to longer border checks or visa issues for fans, and teams might face different regulations affecting their movement.
Coordinating security across three nations presents challenges, yet the event underscores North American unity through sport, relying on effective government communication and collaboration.
The Global Footprint and Environmental Impact
Hosting matches across three large countries significantly impacts local economies and the environment, with substantial carbon emissions from international flights, local transportation, and stadium operations. The event's global scale amplifies the carbon footprint, attracting fans and teams worldwide. Amid growing climate change awareness, the environmental impact of large tournaments is under scrutiny. Organisers have pledged sustainability initiatives, like using renewable energy, waste management, and promoting eco-friendly travel. However, the travel and energy consumption required for multi-country hosting remain major concerns.
Fans journeying worldwide to cheer for their teams demonstrate the tournament's extensive appeal. However, long flights, accommodations, and stadium transportation substantially raise carbon emissions. While the thrill of a global event is undeniable, it's crucial to recognise these environmental impacts. As the tournament approaches, organisers and stakeholders need to balance enthusiasm with responsible environmental practices. This calls for innovative solutions and collaborative efforts from fans, teams, and organisers to safeguard the planet.
Sustainable practices like carbon offset programs, and engaging fans in environmental initiatives are crucial. The tournament's success should be measured not only by the matches' excitement but also by its role in setting a precedent for responsible environmental stewardship in international sports. Based on my observations, money exerts considerable influence, leading FIFA and the USA under President Trump, who is skeptical about climate change, to likely focus on maximising profits while ignoring environmental issues. FIFA consistently neglects environmental concerns in their tournaments, as shown by their recent choices of host countries and the extensive travel distances required for teams.
FIFA Football World Cup 2026 Ticket Prices and Travel Costs
Ticket prices for the 2026 World Cup were initially very high. The combined costs of attending matches across multiple countries, along with travel and accommodation, may make it unaffordable for many fans. The initial pricing for tickets was elevated as a result of FIFA's strategy to maximise revenue, increased operational expenses, and the implementation of dynamic pricing models. This approach included premium pricing for opening matches, such as Mexico vs. South Africa, the introduction of bundled hospitality packages in place of more affordable single tickets, and significant price increases for knockout-stage games targeting corporate and international markets.
Prices have since been reduced after widespread fan backlash, low early demand, and concerns about empty stadiums damaging the tournament’s image. FIFA also faced political pressure from host nations and sponsors, prompting a recalibration to prioritise accessibility, atmosphere, and long-term brand value over short-term profit.
Controversy and The Trump Factor
As the U.S. prepares to co-host the 2026 FIFA World Cup, the expansion of travel restrictions reveals a stark contradiction in global events. Football unites across borders, yet tightening borders highlight political fragmentation. Countries such as Iran, Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire, and Haiti, impacted by these restrictions, have qualified for the tournament, with players probably obtaining exemptions. However, unfairly excluding fans does not create the welcoming atmosphere necessary for a World Cup Football Tournament. If the World Cup involves teams but leaves out the communities, it may become more focused on taking rather than giving, which could reduce its cultural importance and people's involvement. Africa, in particular faces movement restrictions, raising questions of fairness.
Egypt and Iran are engaged in another controversy. The Seattle LGBTQ+ 'Pride Match' at the 2026 World Cup plans to proceed despite Egypt's objections to Fifa. The Egyptian Football Association requested the cancellation of the celebrations during their group game against Iran. The local organising committee confirmed that the 26 June match at Lumen Field, hosting Egypt and Iran from Group G, will celebrate the LGBTQ+ community, despite homosexuality being illegal in both countries.
FIFA President Gianni Infantino ignited significant controversy by presenting the first-ever FIFA Peace Prize to United States President Donald Trump. This award, given at the 2026 World Cup draw in Washington, D.C., has resulted in formal ethics complaints and allegations that Infantino is engaging in "sportswashing" for political advantage.
For the 2026 World Cup to leave a meaningful legacy, there must be a clear vision of a shared world.
Final Thoughts on the 2026 World Cup Challenges
The 2026 Football World Cup promises to be a landmark event with its tri-nation hosting and expanded team format. Yet, the challenges of vast travel distances, extreme heat, natural disasters, political tensions, environmental impact, and high-ticket prices cannot be ignored.
Let's hope that ICE doesn't dampen the spirit of the tournament.
In response to the question: "Will the 2026 Football World Cup be the worst in history?", my answer is YES, particularly concerning the environmental impact of this event
If the environment loses then the world loses.
Although I will be supporting Bafana Bafana and Germany, I think the World Cup winners will be one of these countries: Spain, Argentina, France, or the Netherlands (in that order).
Who do you think will win? Comment below and let us know.
✅Bafana Bafana’s group games
Match 1: Estadio Azteca — Mexico City vs Mexico, on 11 June 2026.
Match 2: Mercedes‑Benz Stadium — Atlanta, Georgia, USA, on 18 June 2026, vs the yet-to-be-determined “UEFA Playoff D” (Czechia, Ireland, Denmark or Macedonia)
Match 3: Estadio BBVA Bancomer — Monterrey, Mexico on 24 June 2026, vs South Korea
Comments