 |
| Image: Magnifique |
FIFA’s Double Standard
A beacon abroad, darkness at home: FIFA’s questionable practices.
Manuel Manrique Castro
Jun 24, 2026
After a long four-year wait—filled with afternoons and evenings of celebration, and others marked by disappointment when the results did not go our way—the 2026 FIFA World Cup finally arrived. This time, it has begun almost like a collective sedative against the bleak international landscape surrounding us, one dominated by troubling news and persistent uncertainty.
The sport that is meant to unite the world through peace and fair play is celebrating its global showcase amid geopolitical disputes, unresolved wars, and tragedies such as the deaths of 168 elementary school girls in Iran, according to UNICEF, as a result of a joint attack by the United States and Israel.
When Canada, the United States, and Mexico were selected in 2018 to host this year’s tournament, success seemed assured and harmony among the three countries appeared inevitable. However, at the beginning of 2025, shortly after starting his second term, the President of the United States not only imposed unexpected tariffs on the country’s two neighbors and principal trading partners, but also continued to insist that Canada should become part of U.S. territory and repeatedly expressed his desire to send troops into Mexico to combat drug trafficking. Trump also stated that he “doesn’t need anything from his neighbors” and has cast doubt on the future of the trade agreement among the three countries, even though he signed the current version—the USMCA—during his previous administration.
Unsurprisingly, these tensions spilled over into soccer. There was no joint opening ceremony, and FIFA instead opted for three separate ceremonies. Canada and Mexico did not hide their discomfort with the way the United States applied its strict immigration policies during the World Cup. Had it not been for Mexico, Iran’s national team would not be participating in the tournament. FIFA itself was not spared criticism. Many viewed it unfavorably that, in what appeared to be an effort to flatter the U.S. president, it created an award called the FIFA Peace Prize, placing it in direct and unfair competition with Norway’s Nobel Peace Prize. Likewise, FIFA failed to take a clear stand against the mistreatment of several participating delegations under U.S. immigration policies. The principles of respect, non-discrimination, and human rights protection that FIFA claims to uphold were reduced to empty words.
In its determination to extract the greatest possible profit from a tournament held only once every four years—and one that accounts for between 75 and 85 percent of its revenue—FIFA has prioritized financial gain at the expense of both fans and the sport itself. Tickets for the 2026 tournament cost seven times more than those for Qatar 2022. Expanding the competition to 48 teams means more matches and more revenue. The introduction of “dynamic pricing” encourages speculation and drives ticket prices to excessive levels. FIFA, despite having long opposed ticket scalping, now operates the only authorized resale marketplace and takes a 30 percent commission.
Mandatory hydration breaks, whether the weather warrants them or not, create multimillion-dollar advertising and sponsorship opportunities, regardless of players’ complaints that they disrupt the flow of the game. FIFA also controls the highly lucrative broadcasting rights for World Cup matches and actively promotes business ventures involving video games and online betting, turning soccer into a casino-like enterprise.
In short, FIFA has established a business model that carries virtually no financial risk for itself, while host countries bear the costs and debts. FIFA retains 100 percent of the revenue generated from ticket sales, broadcasting rights, and sponsorships.
At the press conference held before the start of the tournament, FIFA President Gianni Infantino, after facing questions that challenged his organization’s performance, sought to change the subject by highlighting FIFA’s extensive support for education around the world through the FIFA Foundation.
Perhaps in an effort to heal the wounds left by the FIFA Gate scandal, the FIFA Foundation was established in March 2018, two months before the World Cup in Russia and three years after the U.S. Department of Justice brought charges of racketeering, wire fraud, money laundering, and bribery totaling $150 million dollars against senior FIFA executives. The foundation’s stated mission was to promote gender equality and education, embrace the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, and establish in its charter that its ultimate purpose is “to benefit those most in need and address the world’s most pressing challenges.”
During the 2023–2026 cycle, FIFA generated $13 billion dollars in revenue. Of that amount, it allocated $38 million to the FIFA Foundation—just 0.29 percent of the total (less than one percent)—to support its operations and the social projects it promotes in 159 countries. Many of these projects are valuable and make meaningful contributions to community development. One example can be found in Riosucio, a vulnerable municipality in Colombia’s Chocó Department, where 90 percent of the population is Afro-Colombian and efforts are underway to create safe community spaces in which soccer helps foster social cohesion and supports the development of local children.
The objectives of the Foundation, created eight years ago, and those of FIFA itself, reaffirmed at its 74th Congress in 2024, are commendable. Yet they expose two contradictions. On the one hand, there is the questionable conduct of an organization that has become a transnational business enterprise—one that violates its own rules and exploits the genuine passion of soccer fans. On the other hand, there is an institution that preaches values it does not practice.
FIFA’s core values are built around ethics, integrity, and social development. They promote the rejection of all forms of cheating, as well as honesty and transparency. There is nothing wrong with FIFA seeking to maximize its revenue. However, it would do well to pursue that goal through measures that honor the principles it claims to uphold, preserve the integrity of the game, and respect its commitment to the vast global fan base of the world’s most popular sport. This World Cup, which was announced in 2018 as the “People’s World Cup,” will not live up to that promise.
The sport that is meant to unite the world through peace and fair play is celebrating its global showcase amid geopolitical disputes, unresolved wars, and tragedies such as the deaths of 168 elementary school girls in Iran, according to UNICEF, as a result of a joint attack by the United States and Israel.
When Canada, the United States, and Mexico were selected in 2018 to host this year’s tournament, success seemed assured and harmony among the three countries appeared inevitable. However, at the beginning of 2025, shortly after starting his second term, the President of the United States not only imposed unexpected tariffs on the country’s two neighbors and principal trading partners, but also continued to insist that Canada should become part of U.S. territory and repeatedly expressed his desire to send troops into Mexico to combat drug trafficking. Trump also stated that he “doesn’t need anything from his neighbors” and has cast doubt on the future of the trade agreement among the three countries, even though he signed the current version—the USMCA—during his previous administration.
Unsurprisingly, these tensions spilled over into soccer. There was no joint opening ceremony, and FIFA instead opted for three separate ceremonies. Canada and Mexico did not hide their discomfort with the way the United States applied its strict immigration policies during the World Cup. Had it not been for Mexico, Iran’s national team would not be participating in the tournament. FIFA itself was not spared criticism. Many viewed it unfavorably that, in what appeared to be an effort to flatter the U.S. president, it created an award called the FIFA Peace Prize, placing it in direct and unfair competition with Norway’s Nobel Peace Prize. Likewise, FIFA failed to take a clear stand against the mistreatment of several participating delegations under U.S. immigration policies. The principles of respect, non-discrimination, and human rights protection that FIFA claims to uphold were reduced to empty words.
In its determination to extract the greatest possible profit from a tournament held only once every four years—and one that accounts for between 75 and 85 percent of its revenue—FIFA has prioritized financial gain at the expense of both fans and the sport itself. Tickets for the 2026 tournament cost seven times more than those for Qatar 2022. Expanding the competition to 48 teams means more matches and more revenue. The introduction of “dynamic pricing” encourages speculation and drives ticket prices to excessive levels. FIFA, despite having long opposed ticket scalping, now operates the only authorized resale marketplace and takes a 30 percent commission.
Mandatory hydration breaks, whether the weather warrants them or not, create multimillion-dollar advertising and sponsorship opportunities, regardless of players’ complaints that they disrupt the flow of the game. FIFA also controls the highly lucrative broadcasting rights for World Cup matches and actively promotes business ventures involving video games and online betting, turning soccer into a casino-like enterprise.
In short, FIFA has established a business model that carries virtually no financial risk for itself, while host countries bear the costs and debts. FIFA retains 100 percent of the revenue generated from ticket sales, broadcasting rights, and sponsorships.
At the press conference held before the start of the tournament, FIFA President Gianni Infantino, after facing questions that challenged his organization’s performance, sought to change the subject by highlighting FIFA’s extensive support for education around the world through the FIFA Foundation.
Perhaps in an effort to heal the wounds left by the FIFA Gate scandal, the FIFA Foundation was established in March 2018, two months before the World Cup in Russia and three years after the U.S. Department of Justice brought charges of racketeering, wire fraud, money laundering, and bribery totaling $150 million dollars against senior FIFA executives. The foundation’s stated mission was to promote gender equality and education, embrace the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals, and establish in its charter that its ultimate purpose is “to benefit those most in need and address the world’s most pressing challenges.”
During the 2023–2026 cycle, FIFA generated $13 billion dollars in revenue. Of that amount, it allocated $38 million to the FIFA Foundation—just 0.29 percent of the total (less than one percent)—to support its operations and the social projects it promotes in 159 countries. Many of these projects are valuable and make meaningful contributions to community development. One example can be found in Riosucio, a vulnerable municipality in Colombia’s Chocó Department, where 90 percent of the population is Afro-Colombian and efforts are underway to create safe community spaces in which soccer helps foster social cohesion and supports the development of local children.
The objectives of the Foundation, created eight years ago, and those of FIFA itself, reaffirmed at its 74th Congress in 2024, are commendable. Yet they expose two contradictions. On the one hand, there is the questionable conduct of an organization that has become a transnational business enterprise—one that violates its own rules and exploits the genuine passion of soccer fans. On the other hand, there is an institution that preaches values it does not practice.
FIFA’s core values are built around ethics, integrity, and social development. They promote the rejection of all forms of cheating, as well as honesty and transparency. There is nothing wrong with FIFA seeking to maximize its revenue. However, it would do well to pursue that goal through measures that honor the principles it claims to uphold, preserve the integrity of the game, and respect its commitment to the vast global fan base of the world’s most popular sport. This World Cup, which was announced in 2018 as the “People’s World Cup,” will not live up to that promise.
(English translation edited by Cynthia Selde.)
Well done - the coverage I am watching here in Albania hardly ever covers the games in Mexico or Canada. I feel for the Iranian players being treated that way.
ReplyDeleteExcellent analysis, Manuel. At the 1986 WC in Mexico, cartoons and media reports suggested that FIFA should share some of the profits to help local programs. I wrote to FIFA Sec.General Sepp Blatter urging a contribution to UNICEf, but he immediately responded saying that they follow corporate rules and cannot make such adjustments without all the members agreeing to itl
ReplyDelete