FIFA World Cup 2026 :Canada/Mexico/United States: Discussion Thread

[Sithara007]

There is enough time for each countries to get prepared for the world cup so they can stand a chance to join other team in winning the world cup. The most regions that had been trying to compete well in the world cup are Asians and African including north American that are not so known for having an extra ordinary team..

Asian qualification is one of the toughest. A total of 47 teams usually take part, and out of that only 4 used to qualify to the main tournament until 2022. And two of the most populous nations in the planet (China and India) are part of this confederation, and almost never gets a chance to qualify for the world cup. I am against giving qualification slots based on population size, but if you take out India and China, then that alone accounts for 40% of the world's population. Then there are other countries with a population size of 200 to 300 million, including Indonesia, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The CAF qualification is also quite tough. 5 countries used to qualify until 2022, from a total of 54. And back in 2022, many of the most populous nations (Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia and DRC) failed to qualify. Hopefully the 2026 World Cup will at least have representation from >50% of the planet's population.

Look at this map, you can see vast areas in Asia and Africa unrepresented:

[1714636613]

1714636613

[1714636613]

1714636613

[LDL]

FIFA The best players awards voting competition has recently ended, Lionel Messi has been selected as the FIFA Men's Best in 2022. However, Kylian Mbappé, who performed better than Messi, is in the second position.  But we can guess that Messi will be the best of the year by winning the World Cup 2022 in Qatar. However, my favorite players Karim Benzema and Sadio Mane are both out of Qatar World Cup 2022 due to injuries. While Karim Benzema is in the third position and Sadio Mane is in the sixth position.



https://twitter.com/FabrizioRomano/status/1630327721342427136?s=19

[Pierre 2]

There is enough time for each countries to get prepared for the world cup so they can stand a chance to join other team in winning the world cup. The most regions that had been trying to compete well in the world cup are Asians and African including north American that are not so known for having an extra ordinary team..

Asian qualification is one of the toughest. A total of 47 teams usually take part, and out of that only 4 used to qualify to the main tournament until 2022. And two of the most populous nations in the planet (China and India) are part of this confederation, and almost never gets a chance to qualify for the world cup. I am against giving qualification slots based on population size, but if you take out India and China, then that alone accounts for 40% of the world's population. Then there are other countries with a population size of 200 to 300 million, including Indonesia, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The CAF qualification is also quite tough. 5 countries used to qualify until 2022, from a total of 54. And back in 2022, many of the most populous nations (Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia and DRC) failed to qualify. Hopefully the 2026 World Cup will at least have representation from >50% of the planet's population.

Look at this map, you can see vast areas in Asia and Africa unrepresented:

There should be balance between representation and true qualification. Anyone that know football would say Indian and Chinese teams are very lower quality compared to even eastern European teams. Even if you let them join World Cup finals result can be very similar to what happened to Qatar. I think better take on this would be to change procedure to at least let these teams to experience cup even if they get eliminated early.

[Zlantann]

Asian qualification is one of the toughest. A total of 47 teams usually take part, and out of that only 4 used to qualify to the main tournament until 2022. And two of the most populous nations in the planet (China and India) are part of this confederation, and almost never gets a chance to qualify for the world cup. I am against giving qualification slots based on population size, but if you take out India and China, then that alone accounts for 40% of the world's population. Then there are other countries with a population size of 200 to 300 million, including Indonesia, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The CAF qualification is also quite tough. 5 countries used to qualify until 2022, from a total of 54. And back in 2022, many of the most populous nations (Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia and DRC) failed to qualify. Hopefully the 2026 World Cup will at least have representation from >50% of the planet's population.

I don't think population should be a determine factor for alloting qualification slots because high population doesn't not result to quality performance. Let every nation be given the opportunity to compete for qualification slots.

You are quit correct, African and Asian continent are not treated fairly based on the number of countries they contain. Although the quality of football of teams matters but the number of countries in a continent should be considered when determining the number of teams that will come to the world cup. Some of these African and Asian countries have improved greatly in their football performance, that's why they also need opportunities to showcase their quality. I also advice that most of these countries in Africa and Asia should shun corruption and fund their local league and national teams so that they can always give out quality performance.

[slackovic]

I don't think population should be a determine factor for alloting qualification slots because high population doesn't not result to quality performance. Let every nation be given the opportunity to compete for qualification slots.

You are quit correct, African and Asian continent are not treated fairly based on the number of countries they contain. Although the quality of football of teams matters but the number of countries in a continent should be considered when determining the number of teams that will come to the world cup. Some of these African and Asian countries have improved greatly in their football performance, that's why they also need opportunities to showcase their quality. I also advice that most of these countries in Africa and Asia should shun corruption and fund their local league and national teams so that they can always give out quality performance.

The problem with giving African and Asian countries more spots to qualify for the World Cup is that you need to take some spots from other continents, most likely Europe. And then some of the better teams in Europe would fail to qualify while maybe a weaker team from Africa would qualify for the World Cup. I don't have anything against teams from any continent playing at the World Cup, but they should be the best 48 teams in the world.

[Sithara007]

There should be balance between representation and true qualification. Anyone that know football would say Indian and Chinese teams are very lower quality compared to even eastern European teams. Even if you let them join World Cup finals result can be very similar to what happened to Qatar. I think better take on this would be to change procedure to at least let these teams to experience cup even if they get eliminated early.

I agree on the quality. The Indian team is ranked 104th and they don't even reach the last round of AFC qualifiers most of the times. China is marginally better, and are ranked 80th in FIFA ranking. Two and half decades back, China was included in the top-40, but in due course the quality of their football declined. The problem here is that if you exclude these two countries, there goes 40% of the world's population. I am not in favor of giving direct qualification to these two countries, but there should be some compromise solution which increases the probability of them featuring in the world cup.

[armanda90]

I agree on the quality. The Indian team is ranked 104th and they don't even reach the last round of AFC qualifiers most of the times. China is marginally better, and are ranked 80th in FIFA ranking. Two and half decades back, China was included in the top-40, but in due course the quality of their football declined. The problem here is that if you exclude these two countries, there goes 40% of the world's population. I am not in favor of giving direct qualification to these two countries, but there should be some compromise solution which increases the probability of them featuring in the world cup.

India team is not superior not only with World Cup level but also can't qualify to AFC Cup 2024 in Qatar, but not only with India but also China have spent much money last than three years ago and many star player joined with Chinese Super League teams but can't bring positive impact for China can speak more how to qualify in FIFA World Cup.

For Asian team qualify to FIFA World Cup seems dominate by the same teams national on every time World Cup, between Saudi Arabia, Australia, South Korea, Japan and Iran are the most appearance national teams participants in FIFA World Cup.

[shogun47]

~snip~

It depend on their intentions and what they want to achieve hosting a World Cup. Just see what Qatar is doing now. Some of the stadiums just get removed again. If you think about it that is insane, but their goal never was to build stadiums for the long-term. Their goal was to improve their reputation throughout the world and actually cover up some of the problems the country actually has.

I am not able to verify these numbers, but they are staggering. I didn't read the whole article but it is hard to imagine that this can be profitable in the end. That's even more the case for Qatar because they had to newly build the infrastructure whereas some other hosts would have stadiums available already.

I think Canada, Mexico and the United States are pretty well prepared anyway.

Mexico has hosted the world cup already twice('70, '86), and the US once('94). It's only Canada the one that hasn't hosted the world cup, so I'm sure they will be OK in terms of infrastructure.

But sometimes it's not really a great investment. Brazil comes to mind:

"Brazil Soccer Stadiums: From World Cup Arenas to White Elephants"

Despite the sensationalist news about stadiums not being completed on time, chaos in airports, and the threat of urban violence, the 2014 World Cup in Brazil was one of the greatest ever editions of soccer’s biggest tournament. Brazil’s love of the sport, their beautiful stadiums, the nation’s famous hospitality, and unflinching joie de vivre made the last World Cup unforgettable for every tourist that came to visit. However, three years on, the Brazilian taxpayers are not even close to paying off the most expensive tournament in history, and have received very little in the way of any positive lasting legacy. Of the 12 stadiums used, all but two are either unused, fraught with corruption allegations or have serious structural problems.

Yes it is also hard to tell how much corruption still plays a role no matter who is the actual host of the tournament. When construction companies receive contracts from the government, the people losing are the people living in that country and paying taxes. Those who get well paid contracts don't care when afterwards those stadiums are not even used anymore. That is why on the one hand it is good to get poorer countries involved as well because they should not be excluded, but if they lack the infrastructure and have to invest billions into stadiums when their schools would need the money even more, I don't really think that makes a lot of sense. That's not an easy topic to discuss. Canada, Mexico and the US is alright. Even Mexico doesn't have to build their infrastructure from scratch as they have big enough stadiums with up to roughly 80,000 in capacity.

[bitgolden]

Asian qualification is one of the toughest. A total of 47 teams usually take part, and out of that only 4 used to qualify to the main tournament until 2022. And two of the most populous nations in the planet (China and India) are part of this confederation, and almost never gets a chance to qualify for the world cup. I am against giving qualification slots based on population size, but if you take out India and China, then that alone accounts for 40% of the world's population. Then there are other countries with a population size of 200 to 300 million, including Indonesia, Pakistan and Bangladesh.

The CAF qualification is also quite tough. 5 countries used to qualify until 2022, from a total of 54. And back in 2022, many of the most populous nations (Nigeria, South Africa, Egypt, Ethiopia and DRC) failed to qualify. Hopefully the 2026 World Cup will at least have representation from >50% of the planet's population.

It is good that they are going to get more teams in, but that doesn't mean that China and India will get in. I am guessing that the main reason is that they do not have football teams that could qualify, that's the main reason. We have seen those 4 teams that qualify from Asia and how they did, not really that well to be fair, and considering that situation, if qualified ones were not that good, what do you expect from unqualified ones?

It is true that China and India are huge nations in population, but bringing them to world cup to play against Brazil, Germany, France or whoever else they face, so that they would lose by a large margin, would be even worse than not participating.

[Silberman]

Yes it is also hard to tell how much corruption still plays a role no matter who is the actual host of the tournament. When construction companies receive contracts from the government, the people losing are the people living in that country and paying taxes. Those who get well paid contracts don't care when afterwards those stadiums are not even used anymore. That is why on the one hand it is good to get poorer countries involved as well because they should not be excluded, but if they lack the infrastructure and have to invest billions into stadiums when their schools would need the money even more, I don't really think that makes a lot of sense. That's not an easy topic to discuss. Canada, Mexico and the US is alright. Even Mexico doesn't have to build their infrastructure from scratch as they have big enough stadiums with up to roughly 80,000 in capacity.

Organizing an event like the world cup is very costly so I have always thought that only countries that are very rich or that already have the infrastructure in place should be given the right to host it, now this could seem unfair and in a way it is, but if the world cup is given to a country that has to build everything from scratch and they do not have the money then they will end up accumulating huge debts and spending money in infrastructure they do not need.

[Bushdark]

I agree on the quality. The Indian team is ranked 104th and they don't even reach the last round of AFC qualifiers most of the times. China is marginally better, and are ranked 80th in FIFA ranking. Two and half decades back, China was included in the top-40, but in due course the quality of their football declined. The problem here is that if you exclude these two countries, there goes 40% of the world's population. I am not in favor of giving direct qualification to these two countries, but there should be some compromise solution which increases the probability of them featuring in the world cup.

India team is not superior not only with World Cup level but also can't qualify to AFC Cup 2024 in Qatar, but not only with India but also China have spent much money last than three years ago and many star player joined with Chinese Super League teams but can't bring positive impact for China can speak more how to qualify in FIFA World Cup.

For Asian team qualify to FIFA World Cup seems dominate by the same teams national on every time World Cup, between Saudi Arabia, Australia, South Korea, Japan and Iran are the most appearance national teams participants in FIFA World Cup.

China need experienced players to qualify for the world cup, although china is not a football country that is known to playing football like that but they we need a string team with lots of experienced players for them to get the level of world cup and even qualifying for quarter final. If they keep spending money without workding on player agility and skills, it will take time for them to win up coming games. I could vividly reme6thay it had been long India qualified for world cup because I would like to see them play once again.

[nullama]

~snip~
Yes it is also hard to tell how much corruption still plays a role no matter who is the actual host of the tournament. When construction companies receive contracts from the government, the people losing are the people living in that country and paying taxes. Those who get well paid contracts don't care when afterwards those stadiums are not even used anymore. That is why on the one hand it is good to get poorer countries involved as well because they should not be excluded, but if they lack the infrastructure and have to invest billions into stadiums when their schools would need the money even more, I don't really think that makes a lot of sense. That's not an easy topic to discuss. Canada, Mexico and the US is alright. Even Mexico doesn't have to build their infrastructure from scratch as they have big enough stadiums with up to roughly 80,000 in capacity.

Yeah, corruption is a world wide problem. It's everywhere, and it's hard to remove it.

At the end of the day, the economic incentives usually play a big role in huge events like this one.

I hope we see a great tournament. I was a bit concerned about Qatar, but it ended up being a very entertaining world cup. Hopefully we see the same in the next one.

[rdluffy]

I hope we see a great tournament. I was a bit concerned about Qatar, but it ended up being a very entertaining world cup. Hopefully we see the same in the next one.

In my opinion, the Qatar Cup was the weakest of all the cups I have ever watched, followed by Russia. And I've watched them all since 1994, each cup had its charm and appeal, but the last two were the worst Fifa's choices, most likely based only on power and money.

With the 2026 World Cup, I already foresee that it will be a more enjoyable cup to watch and participate in. Three important countries on the world stage, Canada and the United States being countries with excellent infrastructure, security, and real chances of developing soccer. Mexico I can't talk about the infrastructure because I don't know them personally, but Mexico has a passion for soccer that is very cool, very similar to Brazil and Argentina, and already has stadiums and a very competitive team to play against other countries.

Another thing:

Balance in soccer
The United States, Mexico and Canada will host the 2026 World Cup in which “three more CONCACAF teams will qualify for sure, and possibly even five,” Infantino specified.

“This next World Cup in North America is going to be the World Cup of America; it is going to be the World Cup (2026) that will change the balance in soccer, because we are going to focus our work in this part of the world,” added the FIFA chief.

Source: https://ticotimes.net/2023/02/27/infantino-claims-that-the-2026-world-cup-will-facilitate-the-advancement-of-soccer-in-central-america

This is really excting, if the president of Fifa is telling the true, it's good news

[shogun47]

I hope we see a great tournament. I was a bit concerned about Qatar, but it ended up being a very entertaining world cup. Hopefully we see the same in the next one.

In my opinion, the Qatar Cup was the weakest of all the cups I have ever watched, followed by Russia. And I've watched them all since 1994, each cup had its charm and appeal, but the last two were the worst Fifa's choices, most likely based only on power and money.

With the 2026 World Cup, I already foresee that it will be a more enjoyable cup to watch and participate in. Three important countries on the world stage, Canada and the United States being countries with excellent infrastructure, security, and real chances of developing soccer. Mexico I can't talk about the infrastructure because I don't know them personally, but Mexico has a passion for soccer that is very cool, very similar to Brazil and Argentina, and already has stadiums and a very competitive team to play against other countries.

Another thing:

Balance in soccer
The United States, Mexico and Canada will host the 2026 World Cup in which “three more CONCACAF teams will qualify for sure, and possibly even five,” Infantino specified.

“This next World Cup in North America is going to be the World Cup of America; it is going to be the World Cup (2026) that will change the balance in soccer, because we are going to focus our work in this part of the world,” added the FIFA chief.

Source: https://ticotimes.net/2023/02/27/infantino-claims-that-the-2026-world-cup-will-facilitate-the-advancement-of-soccer-in-central-america

This is really excting, if the president of Fifa is telling the true, it's good news

I never thought that a FIFA president could be more corrupt and idiotic than Sepp Blatter, but then Infantino came around the corner... The guy is weird, he is just weird and talks nonsense and is ignorant of facts in an unbelievable manner.

I absolutely agree with you that the last two World Cups were disappointing. 2010 South Africa, 2006 Germany and also 2002 South Korea Japan, all of those World Cups were fun to follow and nobody thought it was the wrong decision to give those countries the World Cup. It was a completely different feeling with Russia and Qatar.

In terms of infrastructure the next Cup will be awesome, but I think what most people are concerned about could be security in Mexico. However, since Canada and the US are involved I am 100% sure that they are going to assist Mexico wherever they can and that people will feel safe in Mexico. Those three countries make a great combination of all the good stuff that is needed for an awesome tournament.

[LUCKMCFLY]

The thing about the house and the advantage is somewhat ambiguous, if it is necessary to consider that a host team has a little more advantage, but you must have a little more tact when it comes to giving a red or yellow card, because it is the advantage of the host, then it cannot be dealt with radically and harshly either, the hosts are the ones who usually win the first game, but in the case of Qatar things were very different, they even said that Ecuador had offered a lot of money to the players to let themselves win, I don't know if it was speculation or truth, but somehow that causes a lot of curiosity.

Maybe you get the feeling that the host is usually the team that wins the first game, but it has nothing to do with it. It's just because most of the time a host is a country with a good national team like Brazil, Germany, France... But when you look at how Qatar played in the last World Cup, you see that there is no home advantage if you play against a stronger opponent.

It is true and from there many speculations were made, because it began to be said that some sheikhs offered a very large amount of money to the Ecuadorian players, so much money that each player could fix their lives and that of their families, they just had to leave win, however, those same rumors claimed that the players did not accept.

The forceful result of the first World Cup game in Qatar left all that behind, but you are absolutely right, the hosts are those teams that have a lot of quality and it is very difficult to beat them, the truth is that sometimes these types of comments are made because they They are generated on sports channels and there they create debate and arouse some curiosity.

I am a person who always watches every special program of the World Cup and everything that is generated in the host country, and not only the World Cup, every sporting event that refers to fútbol..

[slackovic]

I never thought that a FIFA president could be more corrupt and idiotic than Sepp Blatter, but then Infantino came around the corner... The guy is weird, he is just weird and talks nonsense and is ignorant of facts in an unbelievable manner.

I absolutely agree with you that the last two World Cups were disappointing. 2010 South Africa, 2006 Germany and also 2002 South Korea Japan, all of those World Cups were fun to follow and nobody thought it was the wrong decision to give those countries the World Cup. It was a completely different feeling with Russia and Qatar.

In terms of infrastructure the next Cup will be awesome, but I think what most people are concerned about could be security in Mexico. However, since Canada and the US are involved I am 100% sure that they are going to assist Mexico wherever they can and that people will feel safe in Mexico. Those three countries make a great combination of all the good stuff that is needed for an awesome tournament.

Why do you say that the World Cup held in Qatar was disappointing? I wasn't there so I can't say anything about organization of the competition and how the fans were treated, but on TV it looked pretty OK. There was a lot of surprising results so it was really a good competition. I feel the same with the World Cup that was hosted by Russia five years ago.

[bitgolden]

It is true and from there many speculations were made, because it began to be said that some sheikhs offered a very large amount of money to the Ecuadorian players, so much money that each player could fix their lives and that of their families, they just had to leave win, however, those same rumors claimed that the players did not accept.

The forceful result of the first World Cup game in Qatar left all that behind, but you are absolutely right, the hosts are those teams that have a lot of quality and it is very difficult to beat them, the truth is that sometimes these types of comments are made because they They are generated on sports channels and there they create debate and arouse some curiosity.

I am a person who always watches every special program of the World Cup and everything that is generated in the host country, and not only the World Cup, every sporting event that refers to fútbol..

I bet that was sort of true, like there was an "offer" on the table I am sure, but in the end it would be basically a risk not worth taking. What if they promised to pay you that much, you lost, and they didn't pay? What if they exposed you? Who are you going to complain to? Like are you going to go out and say "they promised us 100 million dollars and we lost but they didn't pay!!" to a judge or something? Of course not.

This is why I believe they didn't take it. In the end, I think USA for example could end up winning, they went out of the group stage, which shows that they are capable of winning, just need a weaker opponent and not some team like brazil or France.

[Leviathan.007]

I never thought that a FIFA president could be more corrupt and idiotic than Sepp Blatter, but then Infantino came around the corner... The guy is weird, he is just weird and talks nonsense and is ignorant of facts in an unbelievable manner.

I absolutely agree with you that the last two World Cups were disappointing. 2010 South Africa, 2006 Germany and also 2002 South Korea Japan, all of those World Cups were fun to follow and nobody thought it was the wrong decision to give those countries the World Cup. It was a completely different feeling with Russia and Qatar.

In terms of infrastructure the next Cup will be awesome, but I think what most people are concerned about could be security in Mexico. However, since Canada and the US are involved I am 100% sure that they are going to assist Mexico wherever they can and that people will feel safe in Mexico. Those three countries make a great combination of all the good stuff that is needed for an awesome tournament.

Why do you say that the World Cup held in Qatar was disappointing? I wasn't there so I can't say anything about organization of the competition and how the fans were treated, but on TV it looked pretty OK. There was a lot of surprising results so it was really a good competition. I feel the same with the World Cup that was hosted by Russia five years ago.

The whole point of disappointment most people are talking about is not what we saw on TV, people think it was a disappointment because they think Qatar hosted the world cup because of the million dollars the spent, and there there were many workers who died during these years there for building the stadium of the world cup, but this time America countries like USA, Canada, and Mexico will host the world cup and we hope to don't see the same story there.

[slackovic]

The whole point of disappointment most people are talking about is not what we saw on TV, people think it was a disappointment because they think Qatar hosted the world cup because of the million dollars the spent, and there there were many workers who died during these years there for building the stadium of the world cup, but this time America countries like USA, Canada, and Mexico will host the world cup and we hope to don't see the same story there.

I see. I thought that he was talking about the competition. Unfortunately, each time such an "exotic" country like Qatar (I mean exotic in football world, not in general. I don't wanna offend someone ) hosts the World Cup, it is and will be followed by many controversy. Countries like that don't have large stadiums so they have to build them. And that often comes with shady businesses where rich people get more richer.

As for the quality of the competition and games that are played, I don't think the hosting country or countries have any influence in that.

[Daniel91]

In fact, the Asian team, South Korea, played in the semi-finals of the World Cup back in 2002 and ended up fourth in the world, just like Morocco now.
At the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, Ghana played in the quarter-finals against Uruguay and in the last minute of the game did not use the penalty to win and advance to the semi-finals.
So, it was obviously only a matter of time before an African national team played in the semi-finals of the World Cup and finally Morocco managed to do it last year at the World Cup in Qatar.
In the future, I expect that the difference in quality between national teams from different continents will decrease even more and we will see even better results from African and Asian national teams.

During the last world cups usually, we had at least one Europian team in the final match and most of teams they played in semi-final and above were Euopian teams but this time, and in last world cup in 2022 Argentina won the cup as an American team and it was signal to say teams from America are still powerful and we can hope on them like this new world cup which is going to be in America. But we didn't see a lot from Asia and being south Korea in the semi-final can be just an expectation.

There is no big progress from the Asian teams, Saudi Arabia won an unexpected win. As an African team Morocco reached the semifinals. Argentina finally won the finals. The involvement of Asian teams isn't that high, but the 2022 world cup hosted by Qatar have made more Asian people watch it. The same have made them follow football later on. This is positive thing and the same could reflect in the future.

Unfortunately Africa and Asia has not progressed much when it comes to internal leagues, when we look at Europe for example we can see that they have several alloys and staggers and even when they are amateur games we can see people watching and we can see that they are games with Quality, but when they are high games from Africa and Asia the quality of games are bad, and because the quality of games in Africa and Asia and very low does not attract large TV channels and large companies to sponsor and as a result Players get little salary

Honestly it is sad when you see that a European player can take his salary of just 1 month and be able to pay a salary from an entire alloy from Africa, and a stark difference, as expected that Africa and Asia see World Cup way? At Asia particularly at least the players 'salary is better than African players' salary, but it also has no quality in the games, there was a time when I watched the South Korean League games, it was a disaster.

I can completely agree with this, the national leagues of Africa and Asia are really organizationally and financially far below the level of European football leagues and the quality of football is low.
However, if you look at the squads of the leading African and Asian teams, you will see that most of their main players actually play in European clubs and leagues and not in the national championships of their countries.
Through the experience of playing in the strongest European leagues, African and Asian players gain important experience, undergo professional training and raise the level of their game and understanding of all aspects of professional football.
This is why it is wrong to say that if football in African and Asian national leagues is bad, that automatically means that their national teams are also bad. Exactly the opposite, and that was brilliantly demonstrated by Morocco at the last world cup in Qatar.