So there is talk of a boycott by European NATO allies and others. FIFA bricking it of course as they stand to lose an astronomical amount of dosh. One possible alternative could be for a boycott of the US specifically, with games involving boycotting teams being moved to Canada and Mexico thus at least salvaging a world cup of sorts from the monumental Trumpist driven cockups. I don't know what will happen but sadly this new America is simply not reliable, or trustworthy. Whatcha think?
Re: World cup
Posted by Rustybar on January 26, 2026, 23:00:24, in reply to "World cup"
Well....even without a well thought out post like yours, there is so much to unpick here that it takes a complete loon to even start.
Just by posting World Cup and "discuss", you would have made life complicated for any respondent!
So over to me then....
This might be a slightly controversial start but when considering any form of boycott, it might aid clear thinking if we momentarily forget Trump altogether (don't worry, he will re-appear in a bit).
I am going to say that any country whose national FA or equivalent believes in football not getting entangled in politics should at the very least publicly threaten a boycott and say they will confirm it by a certain date.
"But doesn't that instantly get football entangled in politics?" I hear you ask. And you are right. But with his actions and decisions at the World Cup draw, Gianni Infantino has put the world of football in a completely impossible position. He has sold the sport he purports to represent down a political river with a suicidal waterfall on the horizon (rivers probably don't have horizons but the people I'm talking about don't care about accuracy so why should I?) He deserves to be punished for it. Football is already entangled in politics thanks to the actions of someone whose remit includes ensuring it doesn't get embroiled in it. And who realistically has it in their gift to simultaneously punish the president of FIFA and the President of the United States? No-one.
No-one that is, except the particpants in the World Cup itself and they can only do this by threatening not to participate. This would then spark a million questions and debates but at the very least it would put Infantino more on the spot than he currently seems to be. Which he fully deserves.
All of my previous doesn't even contemplate what the tournament itself would look like. And the thought is simply horrifying. Trump grandstanding. Probably trying to intervene in footballing decisions, even relating to the outcome of games. Security with the current ICE situation? I know their remit is only to gun down American citizens but it only takes a minor escalation to involve fans doesn't it? At last count, 14 of the known finalists were on Trump's "banned from the USA" list. What if someone travelling with the parties associated with those nations chose to defect to the United States? What happens with security then?
Move all United States games to Canada and Mexico? One of the reasons why the World Cup can only happen in places like Russia, the USA and the Middle East these days is because most countries simply can't afford it and don't have the infrastructure. That includes Mexico and that is why they are only staging six games. The same goes for Uruguay at the 2030 World Cup.
Canada? It is even less of a football country than the United States is. And can you imagine Trump's reaction to everything being moved there?
And yes, I know there are a million things I haven't thought of or attempted to address.
Deb-ret-zun
Re: World cup
Posted by Lunesdale Hatter on January 27, 2026, 19:09:33, in reply to "Re: World cup"
International football i find dull, I struggle to get excited or entertained by it. My kinda boycott started several years ago, as it is always underwhelming, and I have limited interest in it.