By Amaechi Agbo and Agency Report
The 23rd edition of the World Cup will start in 24 hours in Mexico, with the United States and Canada as two other co-host nations. However, with 48 nations participating in the quardranial tournament, featuring 1,248 players, the competition has come under severe scrutiny with accusations and criticisms.
First the choice of the host nation and FIFA President, Gianni Infanttino describing it as “Simply the greatest event that humanity, that mankind, has ever seen”, set the tone a what were to come
The words of Fifa president Gianni Infantino when hailing this summer’s World Cup across the United States of America, Mexico and Canada.
Never afraid to hype football’s showpiece event, the head of the world governing body has portrayed the first pan-continental version as the most inclusive, welcoming and unifying to date.
But many others would choose different superlatives.
The most politicised, for instance. And the most expensive. Potentially the hottest, or the most polluting. Certainly the most lucrative for Fifa.
Whatever one’s perspective, it seems certain that away from the on-field spectacle, this super-sized World Cup could be among the most contentious ever.
From controversy over the costs to fans, the impact of geopolitics and immigration policies, to security, extreme weather, sustainability and the role of US President Donald Trump, it inspires trepidation as well as excitement.
So what will be the principal issues? How did we get here? And what is at stake?
As the eyes of the footballing world focus on Mexico City before Thursday’s opening match, the co-hosts provide a vivid snapshot of what makes the next few weeks so compelling and challenging.
Here in this footballing hotbed, a city that has provided the tournament with some of its most iconic moments, the legendary Estadio Azteca is ready to make history as the first venue to host the start of three different World Cups.
It is a tantalising prospect. But just as in the neighbouring US, where about 75% of the matches will take place, the high cost of tickets has caused concern, as has security in a country that has suffered from major cartel violence this year.
World Cup player statues in the capital have been toppled by protesters, with teachers demanding higher wages threatening to disrupt matches if their wishes are not met.
Meanwhile, in Tijuana, the presence of the Iran squad is a consequence of the complex political tensions surrounding the sporting action.
No other World Cup has been spread over three countries. Nor has it involved as many as 48 teams and 104 matches.
But beyond its sheer scale, this tournament is unprecedented in other ways. Never before, for instance, has a host country been at war with a participating nation.
Just last month, Fifa confirmed the Iran team had moved its base from Arizona to Mexico, the latest result of the military campaign launched in February, when the US and Israel attacked Iran, sparking retaliatory strikes across the Middle East. While a ceasefire came into effect in early April, strikes between the two sides have continued.
In the past few months, confusion has surrounded Iran’s participation, with President Trump at one stage warning it was not “appropriate” for the team to participate “for their own life and safety”. His special envoy even suggested that Iran should be replaced by four-time winners Italy, who had failed to qualify.
Iran now look set to take part in a fourth consecutive World Cup, although the country has accused the US of denying visas to some executives and backroom staff, with an official claiming the players had been told they must enter and leave the US on the same day of their three group matches there.
On Tuesday, Iran’s football federation said its allocation of fan tickets for the group stage had been revoked, adding it “raises serious questions about the interference of non-sporting and political considerations in the organisation of the world’s biggest football event.”
With Fifa reportedly set to ban the pre-revolutionary Iran flag from tournament venues, their games will be politically charged, especially with the first two taking place in Los Angeles, home to a large Persian community.
A ‘deeply politicised’ tournament
Back in 2017, during Trump’s first term, Infantino had suggested a US travel ban on citizens from six majority-Muslim countries was incompatible with tournament regulations, and could invalidate the country’s hopes to host the tournament in 2026.
“It’s obvious when it comes to Fifa competitions, any team, including the supporters and officials of that team, who qualify for a World Cup need to have access to the country, otherwise there is no World Cup,” he warned.
And yet, as a result of the immigration policies implemented by Trump during his second term in office, there will be four competing countries – Iran, Haiti, Senegal and Ivory Coast – whose fans have faced full or partial travel bans, with the White House referencing a need to manage security threats.
In fact, analysis of travel data by the BBC shows that fans from more than a quarter of the 48 countries taking part in the World Cup are facing travel bans, tighter restrictions or high visa rejection rates.
It was only last month that visitors from Algeria, Senegal, Ivory Coast, Cape Verde and Tunisia were granted exemptions from having to pay a deposit of up to $15,000 (£11,000) before obtaining a US visa.
Never miss a moment! Get the stories shaping Nigeria, delivered straight to your phone. Follow Peoplesdaily Newspaper on WhatsApp for breaking news, exclusive reports, and the headlines everyone will be talking about, before anyone else.
