Coach Ralph Soccer Connection
Share
21/07/2026
WORLD CUP DEBRIEF #1: THE 2026 TOURNAMENT
The 2026 World Cup was a success. For me, it was the best World Cup since North America’s previous tournament in 1994. We approached the tournament with some trepidation, but by and large those issues were bypassed. Not totally; I will return to them in due course.
First, the many positives.
The football was entertaining. It was unfortunate that, like ’94, the Final did represent the overall state of play. However, fears that extreme weather conditions and exhausting schedules for the top players would affect the quality of football did not come to pass. Further, the increased number of games and the competing minnows generally did not affect the proceedings. Indeed, the smaller nations provided many of the highlights. Curaçao, after a 7-1 shellacking by Germany, recovered and performed with credit. Cape Verde did even better, holding Spain, the eventual champions, to a 0-0 draw. The game gave the football world a new hero to cheer: Vozinha, a veteran 40-year-old keeper playing in Portugal’s second division. “Cabo Verde” made the knockout rounds, falling 3-2 in extra time to defending champions Argentina. Overall, 2026 gave us much to enjoy on the football field.
The fans flocked to the games en masse. Ticket prices way in excess of previous tourneys did not detract from the attendance. South American fans brought their passion and colour as always, though I expect it was via the significant diasporas, as opposed to travelling fans, each nation possesses in the USA. Several European teams showed their fanbases off in a manner that will not soon be forgotten. The Dutch Oranje with their “Links Rechts” Left-right march to the stadiums, the Norwegian fans' “Viking Row”, and in Boston, where I live, the Tartan Army took over the city. Statues throughout the city centre could be found wearing traffic cones on their heads. A custom of the Scottish fans. We should also not forget the college town of Lawrence, Kansas, and their love affair with the Algerian national team. Overall, the fans, teams and the World Cup overshadowed America’s 250th. I’m old enough to remember the Bicentennial. Even living in England at the time, it was difficult to ignore that the USA was having a giant party. In 2026, the party was the World Cup.
Accordingly, the 2026 World Cup was a great spectacle. ’94 was a success due to record-setting attendance, which provided impetus to establish a professional soccer league. ’26 went further with its packed, colourful, space-age stadiums. It became an event for sections of the American populace unfamiliar with the game. As if scripted, the big names showed up: Mbappe, Kane, Haaland, and of course Lionel Messi. Though he showed his age in the latter stages, the diminutive Argentinian could still pull some strings. It’s good for the future of the American game with Messi continuing to show his skills in the MLS. TV cameras regularly caught the fun moments, spotting the personalities of sports, screen, and the music world in the crowd. Soccer continues to come of age in the USA.
Media coverage of soccer hit new heights in the USA. Back in 1994, the tournament was covered primarily on television and in the newspapers. This time it was more. The internet and social media gave us new heroes, replays of the great goals, and controversial incidents. It gave a new dimension. I followed the tournament primarily through podcasts. A shout-out to James Richardson’s “Totally Football Show”, the Brazilian Shirt podcast, the Sports Agents and Men in Blazers. BBC’s South American correspondent Tim Vickery and Henry Winter of World Soccer provide much insight lacking on television.
Beyond the games, TV coverage had its moments. James Corden was brought back with a soccer-related late, late show, “After Hours”, that gave us laughs and generally reflected the joy the World Cup was bringing to the country. Even former Patriots (American) football star Rob Gronkowski had his own World Cup show: “The Other Football”. TV wasn’t like this in ’94. Ditto the television commercials dominated by footballers: 1) David Beckham, 2) Lionel Messi, 3) Christian Pulisic. Pre-tournament cynics claimed that 20% of the country’s 330 million population had no idea that the World Cup was happening. It should be close to zero by now. The World Cup was everywhere. The television audience for the USA-Belgium and England-Mexico quarter-finals reached an estimated 33 million, exceeding the NBA Finals, completed at the start of the tournament, by 13 million.
So much positivity, but as we feared beforehand, it wasn’t always a bed of roses. Gianni Infantino’s FIFA and the so-called “Geopolitical World Cup” still reared their ugly heads.
First, there was the “magic dollar”. Infantino priced the tickets around what he gauged American sporting events would cost. Many games were priced considerably beyond. In a brushstroke, many true fans were priced out. It did not detract from overall attendance; I’m sure Gianni will feel justified making more of the magic dollar. It was considerable. Infantino and FIFA generated a record-breaking revenue of $15 billion, twice that of the 2022 Qatar Tournament.
Passing costs onto the hosts meant significantly higher costs for train travel to the stadiums. It was expensive to be there. What this means for future tournaments and other FIFA events remains to be seen. I’m interested in attending the Women’s World Cup next summer in Brazil. Will Infantino price tickets for the locals or go for the cash grab once again? Add in hydration breaks, which were for the benefit of television corporations and which it is said FIFA will seek direct recompense for in the future, plus a 64-nation tournament. Infantino’s direction appears to be clear.
Second, FIFA's supposedly non-political concerns appeared to involve politics. The organisation didn’t cover itself in glory in several respects. It created a mythical “peace prize,” and since then FIFA and Infantino have continually appeared to act in a manner that wasn’t non-political. The most recent example being the Malvinas banner by the Argentinian team. In 2024, two Spanish players were banned for 2 games following a comparable demonstration over Gibraltar. This time, ‘¡de nada!’
Of course, all was overshadowed by the furore over USMNT’s striker Folarin Balogun’s red card, which was going to prevent him playing in the quarter-finals. Presidential intervention, admitting no knowledge of what a red card was, led FIFA to suspend the card for a year. A similar offence by England’s Jarrell Quansah - serious foul play - was punished with a two-match ban. As a fan, I thought the Balogun red was harsh while the Quansah call was the correct one. However, that is not the point. FIFA unashamedly bent to political pressure. Of course, Infantino sidestepped the issue, passing the decision on to an unnamed disciplinary committee. Nobody believes him.
While politics didn’t run amok as feared, there was still a Somali referee being denied entry, and the treatment of the Iranian team was shoddy. They performed remarkably well despite the hurdles placed by the government. The Final was anticipated to be a potential stage for the current administration. It was not as overtly bad as the Club World Cup Final 12 months earlier. However, the singing of the US national anthem, the anthem of the host, is both unparalleled and unnecessary. Then the presentation of the trophy. Why a person who has been so critical of Spain of late - “a wasted cause” - would want to be pictured with the celebrating Spanish team is a mystery to me. I understand in Spain he was photoshopped out of the team’s celebrations.
Finally, with great irony, Andrew Giuliani, Executive Director of the White House Task Force for the World Cup, commenting on the Argentinian Malvinas banner, stated it is their First Amendment right in America to have the right to free speech. In the past week, when government officials posed the direct question of whether Joe Biden won the 2020 election, they feared for their place if they responded in a way not acceptable to the administration. This is the First Amendment right to free speech?
Putting all aside, kudos to the fans and the media for their overall coverage of the 2026 World Cup. There was much joy and goodwill on display. A special mention to a Scouser, Roger Bennett, and his Men in Blazers media group. Over the last 12 months, Bennett has provided a build-up focused on excitement and anticipation. I admit I was dubious, but well done, Roger; you persevered and won the day. So did many others. Despite all the nonsense, football was the winner. The main takeaway of the 2026 World Cup is clear: soccer in the United States has taken a huge step in the right direction.
Next debrief, I will look at the national teams of the USA, Scotland, and England.
Hyundai Goal of the Tournament | Best Goals of the FIFA World Cup 2026™ The best goals. One final winner. ⚽🏆Relive the standout finishes f...
WILL THE LEGACY OF THE 2026 U.S. WORLD CUP BE DAMAGED?
The Folarin Balogun controversy has disappeared into the rear-view mirror. Or has it? We entered this year’s World Cup fearing political interference. There have been glimpses. A Somali referee was denied entry. The treatment of the Iranian team was another such instance. Overall, we had been spared. Distance had been kept. Thanks, perhaps, to the New York Knicks fans who summed up the feelings of an ever-growing majority of Americans about what is happening in the country. Adding fans from all over the world at a time when the image of the USA has been on a downward spiral might only spike the cocktail. Things changed in the wake of the Balogun red card.
For 3 weeks, the World Cup had taken the United States by storm. Huge crowds in impressive modern stadiums, great football, memorable goals and moments enjoyed by passionate, colourful fans with record television ratings for the sport, allied to blanket coverage across social media. The USA is acutely aware that this event has made it the focal point of the planet.
Where there was once doubt over 2026, the legacy of Association Football, soccer as it is known here, appeared to be taking a massive step forward in sports-crazy USA. The US national team's exciting performances played a major part in the story. The USA have become a World Cup regular, but the style of football on display far exceeded that of past American squads on the world’s biggest stage. In a flash, everything changed with a VAR intervention in the USA-Bosnia & Herzegovina match. Star striker Folarin Balogun was dismissed with a red card, suspending him from the last-16 matchup with Belgium. The nation understandably cried when a key player was lost amid highly contentious circumstances. However, that is the game, and these are the rules.
What, indeed, happened around and after this fateful incident? The debate moved from the sporting field to the White House desk. Let’s take a closer look.
1. Between the officials, on the field and in the VAR booth, made a call to send off Balogun. It was a decision that many others and I did not agree with. Was it the wrong call? What we think is immaterial. Unless there is impropriety, theirs is the decision that counts. Whilst the decision was widely criticised, others supported the call. Whatever our opinions, future discussion of this matter should be reserved within the soccer fraternity.
2. Post-game, FIFA made it clear that there was no recourse for a red card under tournament rules. An automatic 1 game suspension was the result. Standard procedure!
3. Things changed the day before the last 16 matchup quite dramatically. Out of the blue, FIFA lifted the suspension, stating that Balogun was eligible to play. This came after the following had happened over the intervening days:
- The President of the USA had phoned FIFA President Gianni Infantino about the matter, requesting a review of a “horrible call”
- The Executive Director of the White House World Cup Task Force, Andrew Giuliani, assembled a group of lawyers to challenge the validity of the card based on what they claimed was an incorrect VAR procedure. Could this be interpreted as pressure?
- Infantino appears to have caved, though he did claim the decision was made through an independent branch of FIFA’s disciplinary body; they invoked a vague FIFA article with little further explanation
- The football world was enraged. The perception was that the USA were being given preferential treatment, as the situation was unparalleled and went against long-established procedures
I move in US soccer circles, and the majority of those I know shared feelings similar to those of the rest of the world. However, I was surprised that a substantial number thought the red card reversal was warranted. Essentially, the call was wrong, and this was just correcting it. Ignored was the influence of an external political force that was now driving the sporting situation. The relationship between the two Presidents at the heart of the matter is well chronicled. Perhaps the outcome shouldn’t be viewed as a shock.
As the controversy grew, all kinds of reasons were being presented to justify overturning the red card. The sporting considerations came a distant second to victory. The fact that the President admitted he had little knowledge of what a red card was, let alone everything surrounding it, was conveniently bypassed. Ultimately, winning was all that mattered.
In one fell swoop, the legacy of the 2026 World Cup was tarnished by this sorry affair. Over the last couple of years, the United States of America's international reputation has taken a significant battering. All of a sudden, YouTube was full of videos of football fans celebrating the USA and its people. It wasn’t what they expected. They loved the country, and the American people had been so welcoming. The football games were fantastic, with the USMNT being unexpectedly impressive. In a heartbeat, much of the positivity that the tournament had brought was under attack. The world soured, and after this debacle, many wanted to see the USA fail against Belgium.
They did, but what is more significant is how sad it is on many levels. In no way are the members of the US National Team and Folarin Balogun at fault. They are not the bad guys. An uncalled-for intervention changed the mood worldwide. Additionally, it affected the match. The US team looked like a different team from the one that performed so credibly before. They were meek, mild and riddled with errors. The opposing Belgians were a stark contrast: hungry, ruthless and highly motivated. Had the intervention backfired? Apparently! Perhaps the USA, playing minus Balogun, might have been a wounded animal. Instead, a resounding 4-1 defeat. I’m sure a win would have brought considerable PR from the White House today. The quiet on the matter is deafening.
Looking beyond all of this, who is most responsible for all of this? Gianni Infantino seems to be the one who should carry the can for many. He has continually allowed politics to interfere with the sport and, on this occasion, brought the World Cup's sporting integrity directly into question. Ultimately, will the legacy of the 2026 World Cup be damaged in the USA?
The spectacle of the opening weeks overcame many of the fears we held before the first ball was kicked. The extraordinary game we saw today between Egypt and Argentina will surely go some way toward allaying some of the hurt the 2026 tournament has felt the past couple of days. Future games, more goals, more excitement, and hopefully everything might fade. Conversely, in the halls of FIFA headquarters in Zurich, the incident needs to be resolved to preserve the integrity of the World Cup for future years.
Here in Boston, I know the 2026 World Cup has been profound. The Scottish “Tartan Army”, the travelling support of Scotland, made such an impression that the Boston Globe took out a full-page ad to thank them for the time they spent lighting up the city with their “infectious joy and culture”. Not far behind are the Norwegian Vikings. At soccer camp today, the legacy they left was on full display.
YNWA