The 2026 FIFA World Cup delivered spectacle on the pitch but left a sour taste off it, according to a comprehensive review by football writer Jonathan Wilson. While the tournament produced moments of drama, Wilson concluded that the competition was merely “good rather than great” and was overshadowed by governance failures and commercial excess.
On-field verdict: bright start, dull finish
The early knockout stages provided genuine excitement, with Wilson highlighting several standout fixtures including Brazil versus Japan, Morocco against the Netherlands, England versus Mexico, and Argentina’s clash with Cape Verde. Norway’s victories over Côte d’Ivoire and Brazil also earned praise, alongside Belgium’s meeting with Senegal and Argentina’s battle with Egypt.
However, the momentum faltered as the tournament progressed. The quarter-finals were described as “not especially inspiring,” while the final was branded “dismal” and “an awful affair.” Spain’s victory over France in the semi-final was deemed “almost too easy,” with La Roja establishing dominance that was never seriously challenged. Wilson suggests this underwhelming conclusion, combined with Argentina’s controversial path to the latter stages, places the 2026 tournament below the 2018 and 2022 editions in historical rankings.
The Balogun Affair and political interference
Wilson identifies the handling of “The Balogun Affair” as a defining scandal of the tournament. FIFA allegedly bent qualification rules under political pressure to ensure a high-profile player could participate, sweeping aside 64 years of precedent. This followed similar interventions regarding Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi in previous competitions, with Gianni Infantino accused of manipulating Club World Cup qualification criteria to guarantee Messi’s involvement.
This pattern of favouritism has sparked criticism from British and American politicians, raising questions about whether revenue generation now supersedes sporting integrity. Wilson warns that such compromises may become normalized, or alternatively, could galvanise opposition to Infantino’s leadership.
Commercial excess and social costs
The 2026 edition marked a shift from mass participation to luxury event, with ticket prices placing the tournament beyond the reach of ordinary supporters. Host cities across the United States, Canada and Mexico paid significant financial and social costs. In North American cities, authorities conducted street sweeps of homeless populations, confiscating possessions, identification and medication. In Mexico, World Cup construction projects triggered outcry over water extraction and environmental damage.
FIFA’s attitude towards the media drew particular criticism. Italian publication La Gazzetta dello Sport saw its final ticket allocation slashed from five to two after publishing a critical assessment labelling the tournament a “disaster.” Wilson notes that while some venues like Houston and Atlanta were welcoming, basic organisational standards were the worst seen at a World Cup in at least six editions.
Future implications
The controversies may have lasting consequences for the competition’s structure. Wilson suggests that Infantino could push to expand the World Cup to 64 teams to consolidate political support, particularly after immigration policies in the United States and Canada damaged relations with the Global South. The treatment of Iran during the tournament also sets a concerning precedent for future host nations and participant selection.
While Wilson acknowledges that the football itself provided entertainment, the combination of a poor final, governance scandals and the prioritisation of profit over supporter welfare leaves the 2026 World Cup’s legacy contested.