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

[Wiwo]

That's true the amount of effort Qataris put in the last world cup way was too much and no country can do something like that including America, Canada.  Qatar planned for everything the stadiums ,environment, fans , teams and their settlement in that time there was a celebration going on in Qatar at that time so that's the fact.
We have to wait for 2026 to see how 3 countries will think of these things.

World Cup hosting is not a small job and before FIFA will choose a country to host the world they already hfirst-handhand knowledge of the capacity of the countries to meet up with FIFA standards in terms of stadiums,  training grounds and hotels etc, and many more is what consists in the consultation period before to the start of any world cup and regardless who spend the money to keep the thing up to date between the FIFA body or host countries it's also important to note the unilateral standard practice as covered in the final law.

We have 3 years before the next world cup,  but then plans are already on the way to put everything in place before the start of next year.

[og kush420]

That's true the amount of effort Qataris put in the last world cup way was too much and no country can do something like that including America, Canada.  Qatar planned for everything the stadiums ,environment, fans , teams and their settlement in that time there was a celebration going on in Qatar at that time so that's the fact.
We have to wait for 2026 to see how 3 countries will think of these things.

World Cup hosting is not a small job and before FIFA will choose a country to host the world they already hfirst-handhand knowledge of the capacity of the countries to meet up with FIFA standards in terms of stadiums,  training grounds and hotels etc, and many more is what consists in the consultation period before to the start of any world cup and regardless who spend the money to keep the thing up to date between the FIFA body or host countries it's also important to note the unilateral standard practice as covered in the final law.

We have 3 years before the next world cup,  but then plans are already on the way to put everything in place before the start of next year.

obviously - the countries would have been working on this after the end of last world cup
the rich countries like Qatar have made the new infrastructure and then they have gifted all that infrastructure to the poor countries - isn't it interesting?

[Cryptock]

~snip~
A country that has much love football,  this love is not enough for  the country to host world cup. For a country to host world cup their are many things that are required for a country to get opportunity of hosting world cup. Good facilities,  security and other things , this must be available.

It's actually going to be four countries, not just one. Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, and Paraguay are bidding for the 2030 World Cup.

If they actually get it, it would be an awkward South American qualification. There are 10 teams, and from the next world cup there will be 6 directly qualified teams with one going to playoffs.

With 4 South American countries qualified as hosts, and 6 directly qualifying, that would mean the whole continent would qualify for that world cup, without a single qualifying match needed.

Even though I can see the advantage of hosting the World Cup in South America, because there are some good economies here and of course the big passion people feel for football. I would also like this event to be hosted in more exotic places in the future.

Perhaps, the organizations and sponsors do not feel the need of doing so, but I think it would be a good chance to promote this sport in countries where it does not have as much importance in South America.

It is just an idea, sure, but I still recall how people got very excited in Africa when the WC got there for the first time ever back in 2010.

A quad-nation World Cup, huh? Quite the gathering! No doubt, South America's got the vibes for hosting the extravaganza. But let's not kid ourselves—our big, beautiful world's got more to offer. Imagine this: The World Cup in Antarctica! Envision those penguins dribbling on ice, while huskies officiate the matches. Or, what about a lunar World Cup? With low gravity, we'd witness otherworldly goals. Alright, alright, I'll reel it in. The gist is, let's stir the pot. Introduce the World Cup to fresh, uncharted territories. Who's to say we won't uncover hidden soccer prodigies along the way?

Those are indeed very exotic places but being serious, I had other places in mind, like Mongolia, El Salvador, Cuba, Malta, Nigeria, etc. Places where a World Cup has had never been celebrated and give the people of that country the joy of an unique experience and worldwide cover.

Also, the cover would not be only about Football, usually news channels and documentary film makers pay attention to WC hosts to spread awareness of social problems, that is what they have done in Brazil and South Africa in the past.

One of the challenges would be security and keeo things in order for foreigners who would come to visit, but I would be confident that the organizers could achieve it.

that is not correct - people had a chance to travel to Qatar and they really cherished the moment of traveling to Qatar for fun and to explore the country
there are many thoughts behind the FIFA we are unable to identify it

[Theones]

Players and fans have plenty of time to create visas. But not every fan and player should get multiple visas, because cup format is made so, that qualification part will be in one country, but play-off and finals will be in US. Canada and Mexico will be presented by two stadium each, but US with 11 stadium all across country. So if you are a fan of a weak country (sorry for that) you probably dont have to get multiple visas

For players it will be much simpler. Like cruises. You get visa to US to board the cruise ship and go ashore to Mexico without Mexican visa. I suppose same system will be for fans also.

U see only one problem with USA - a lot of people gonna get visas "because of football cup", but some of them gonna stay in US as immigrants for ever, taking into consideration fact that they cant get visa there normally. Such things always happen with poor countries. There was even a case (dont remember if it was Olympic games or football cup), when plane with athletes landed, and during the event part of them disappeared, because they ran away from poverty and dictatorship in their homeland.

in my country visa fee for america is approx $100 dollars and the currency rate is very high not everyone can afford going to the USA likewise visa fee for Canada is double the American visa fee. So I dont think most of the fans will be able to make to USA for world cup

[sovie]

Players and fans have plenty of time to create visas. But not every fan and player should get multiple visas, because cup format is made so, that qualification part will be in one country, but play-off and finals will be in US. Canada and Mexico will be presented by two stadium each, but US with 11 stadium all across country. So if you are a fan of a weak country (sorry for that) you probably dont have to get multiple visas

For players it will be much simpler. Like cruises. You get visa to US to board the cruise ship and go ashore to Mexico without Mexican visa. I suppose same system will be for fans also.

U see only one problem with USA - a lot of people gonna get visas "because of football cup", but some of them gonna stay in US as immigrants for ever, taking into consideration fact that they cant get visa there normally. Such things always happen with poor countries. There was even a case (dont remember if it was Olympic games or football cup), when plane with athletes landed, and during the event part of them disappeared, because they ran away from poverty and dictatorship in their homeland.

in my country visa fee for america is approx $100 dollars and the currency rate is very high not everyone can afford going to the USA likewise visa fee for Canada is double the American visa fee. So I dont think most of the fans will be able to make to USA for world cup

In fact, the way we're discussing the next World Cup right now, I think it's getting a little too much. Because it is very difficult to understand what the world will be like in the next World Cup and how inflation will be like. But I believe FIFA authorities will do something great for us.

[Maslate]

I think it is not about investing as much as Qatar did, because nobody really needs to invest as much as they did, it was a stupid move to give the world cup to a nation that had to invest that much to be worthy of it, makes no sense at all. It is official that it was bribery that made Qatar win it, hell Fifa CEO ended up getting fired for accepting bribe, what else proof do we even need?

Hosting the World Cup in Qatar was proof that money is what defines the course of the biggest football event in the world.
FIFA CEO sacked? That's the least that should happen, don't believe that corruption ends there, because this was just a "deal" made because someone needed to be punished, but I'm sure there's a lot more rotten garbage in Fifa than just the CEO.

I believe the 2026 world cup will be "less corrupt" as FIFA needs to clear its name after what happened in Qatar.

We will likely see about that after the next FIFA world cup but I slightly agree with you because after what happened, they will certainly have a low profile for a moment so that they will not be in the middle of the heat but they cannot deny that they were being biased at that point because after all this is an entertainment business. What happened recently about CEO getting sacked was just their step to get their hands clean and I seriously agree that there's a much bigger picture than that.

I think we shouldn't close our eyes to that, that in every aspect there must be unscrupulous individuals who commit bribery and corruption, that's commonplace. And I agree that this dismissal is their way to clean their hands from rotten garbage. But we don't know how many people are still hanging around in FIFA.
Not only that, but when they always talk about keeping politics away from football it is also just a slogan, because I see that politics is still very thick, so this is a kind of slogan that has no effect whatsoever.

There's no doubt that there are a lot more corrupt individuals inside the FIFA council, they are like elites on their own which makes them hard to touch if there are no concrete evidence that points towards them. We may have no solid proof about it but we can actually say that there are miracles happening behind the scenes but at one point, we cannot really blame them as there will be no miracles if countries that are so eager to host a World Cup will just take the process fairly without using their connections and money.

[Naficopa]

I think it is not about investing as much as Qatar did, because nobody really needs to invest as much as they did, it was a stupid move to give the world cup to a nation that had to invest that much to be worthy of it, makes no sense at all. It is official that it was bribery that made Qatar win it, hell Fifa CEO ended up getting fired for accepting bribe, what else proof do we even need?

Hosting the World Cup in Qatar was proof that money is what defines the course of the biggest football event in the world.
FIFA CEO sacked? That's the least that should happen, don't believe that corruption ends there, because this was just a "deal" made because someone needed to be punished, but I'm sure there's a lot more rotten garbage in Fifa than just the CEO.

I believe the 2026 world cup will be "less corrupt" as FIFA needs to clear its name after what happened in Qatar.

We will likely see about that after the next FIFA world cup but I slightly agree with you because after what happened, they will certainly have a low profile for a moment so that they will not be in the middle of the heat but they cannot deny that they were being biased at that point because after all this is an entertainment business. What happened recently about CEO getting sacked was just their step to get their hands clean and I seriously agree that there's a much bigger picture than that.

I think we shouldn't close our eyes to that, that in every aspect there must be unscrupulous individuals who commit bribery and corruption, that's commonplace. And I agree that this dismissal is their way to clean their hands from rotten garbage. But we don't know how many people are still hanging around in FIFA.
Not only that, but when they always talk about keeping politics away from football it is also just a slogan, because I see that politics is still very thick, so this is a kind of slogan that has no effect whatsoever.

There's no doubt that there are a lot more corrupt individuals inside the FIFA council, they are like elites on their own which makes them hard to touch if there are no concrete evidence that points towards them. We may have no solid proof about it but we can actually say that there are miracles happening behind the scenes but at one point, we cannot really blame them as there will be no miracles if countries that are so eager to host a World Cup will just take the process fairly without using their connections and money.

But one of the reasons why Qatar World Cup will go down in history is that Qatar has spent a lot of money to build the World Cup stadiums. The stadiums that look beautiful and eye-popping. But I don't think any other country can host such a big World Cup. But yes, it is expected that we will see some new arrangements.

[Jody.Drummer]

There's no doubt that there are a lot more corrupt individuals inside the FIFA council, they are like elites on their own which makes them hard to touch if there are no concrete evidence that points towards them. We may have no solid proof about it but we can actually say that there are miracles happening behind the scenes but at one point, we cannot really blame them as there will be no miracles if countries that are so eager to host a World Cup will just take the process fairly without using their connections and money.

Yes, the only reason why they are difficult to touch is because there is no authentic evidence that can be used to touch them even deeper. However, the name of a crime will gradually be revealed, as for example what happened recently which ended with the dismissal of the FIFA CEO. Something like this would definitely smell no matter how well they hid it. Because when their CEO did it, it would be very doubtful if the other members did not know about and feel the bribes they received.

But one of the reasons why Qatar World Cup will go down in history is that Qatar has spent a lot of money to build the World Cup stadiums. The stadiums that look beautiful and eye-popping. But I don't think any other country can host such a big World Cup. But yes, it is expected that we will see some new arrangements.

True, Qatar prepared very well and they spent a lot of money to make the World Cup a success. In terms of finances there is no doubt for Qatar because they have a lot of budget. They are serious about being the host, even with the problems that occur which I think are very common things on a very big stage like the World Cup which is the biggest party of the world's footballers.

[Leviathan.007]

I think it is not about investing as much as Qatar did, because nobody really needs to invest as much as they did, it was a stupid move to give the world cup to a nation that had to invest that much to be worthy of it, makes no sense at all. It is official that it was bribery that made Qatar win it, hell Fifa CEO ended up getting fired for accepting bribe, what else proof do we even need?

Hosting the World Cup in Qatar was proof that money is what defines the course of the biggest football event in the world.
FIFA CEO sacked? That's the least that should happen, don't believe that corruption ends there, because this was just a "deal" made because someone needed to be punished, but I'm sure there's a lot more rotten garbage in Fifa than just the CEO.

I believe the 2026 world cup will be "less corrupt" as FIFA needs to clear its name after what happened in Qatar.

We will likely see about that after the next FIFA world cup but I slightly agree with you because after what happened, they will certainly have a low profile for a moment so that they will not be in the middle of the heat but they cannot deny that they were being biased at that point because after all this is an entertainment business. What happened recently about CEO getting sacked was just their step to get their hands clean and I seriously agree that there's a much bigger picture than that.

I think we shouldn't close our eyes to that, that in every aspect there must be unscrupulous individuals who commit bribery and corruption, that's commonplace. And I agree that this dismissal is their way to clean their hands from rotten garbage. But we don't know how many people are still hanging around in FIFA.
Not only that, but when they always talk about keeping politics away from football it is also just a slogan, because I see that politics is still very thick, so this is a kind of slogan that has no effect whatsoever.

There's no doubt that there are a lot more corrupt individuals inside the FIFA council, they are like elites on their own which makes them hard to touch if there are no concrete evidence that points towards them. We may have no solid proof about it but we can actually say that there are miracles happening behind the scenes but at one point, we cannot really blame them as there will be no miracles if countries that are so eager to host a World Cup will just take the process fairly without using their connections and money.

But one of the reasons why Qatar World Cup will go down in history is that Qatar has spent a lot of money to build the World Cup stadiums. The stadiums that look beautiful and eye-popping. But I don't think any other country can host such a big World Cup. But yes, it is expected that we will see some new arrangements.

You are wrong, there are many other rich countries that can spend much more and invest for the next world cup even more than Qatar, the only positive thing about the Qatar world cup was the shinning stadiums and the money the spent on it, while in Qatar the visitors were not happy because the rules they had in their country and they didn't make any exceptions for the world cup.

[FanEagle]

But one of the reasons why Qatar World Cup will go down in history is that Qatar has spent a lot of money to build the World Cup stadiums. The stadiums that look beautiful and eye-popping. But I don't think any other country can host such a big World Cup. But yes, it is expected that we will see some new arrangements.

True, Qatar prepared very well and they spent a lot of money to make the World Cup a success. In terms of finances there is no doubt for Qatar because they have a lot of budget. They are serious about being the host, even with the problems that occur which I think are very common things on a very big stage like the World Cup which is the biggest party of the world's footballers.

Like most people mentioned before, we need a combination of these two together. It has to be a football nation like England, and it has to be rich like Qatar, that would give them a great advantage. I mean surely England could also spend as much, but then they would have to cut it from something else, and that ain't ideal, or they would have to print and value would drop again and they do not want that.

All in all there is a situation to handle and they can't really handle it all. I personally hope that the best thing to do in this case is to let Fifa keep deciding it and see which one feels the best .You can't have it at the same nation over and over again anyway, which means there should be a few nations that gets better eventually with some chances to host it.

[Cryptock]

Players and fans have plenty of time to create visas. But not every fan and player should get multiple visas, because cup format is made so, that qualification part will be in one country, but play-off and finals will be in US. Canada and Mexico will be presented by two stadium each, but US with 11 stadium all across country. So if you are a fan of a weak country (sorry for that) you probably dont have to get multiple visas

For players it will be much simpler. Like cruises. You get visa to US to board the cruise ship and go ashore to Mexico without Mexican visa. I suppose same system will be for fans also.

U see only one problem with USA - a lot of people gonna get visas "because of football cup", but some of them gonna stay in US as immigrants for ever, taking into consideration fact that they cant get visa there normally. Such things always happen with poor countries. There was even a case (dont remember if it was Olympic games or football cup), when plane with athletes landed, and during the event part of them disappeared, because they ran away from poverty and dictatorship in their homeland.

IT will be surly very expensive to have visas and accomodation at three different countries
People would visit a place of two - most of the people will be middle class like me they won't be able to afford the 3 country stay

[og kush420]

But one of the reasons why Qatar World Cup will go down in history is that Qatar has spent a lot of money to build the World Cup stadiums. The stadiums that look beautiful and eye-popping. But I don't think any other country can host such a big World Cup. But yes, it is expected that we will see some new arrangements.

True, Qatar prepared very well and they spent a lot of money to make the World Cup a success. In terms of finances there is no doubt for Qatar because they have a lot of budget. They are serious about being the host, even with the problems that occur which I think are very common things on a very big stage like the World Cup which is the biggest party of the world's footballers.

Like most people mentioned before, we need a combination of these two together. It has to be a football nation like England, and it has to be rich like Qatar, that would give them a great advantage. I mean surely England could also spend as much, but then they would have to cut it from something else, and that ain't ideal, or they would have to print and value would drop again and they do not want that.

All in all there is a situation to handle and they can't really handle it all. I personally hope that the best thing to do in this case is to let Fifa keep deciding it and see which one feels the best .You can't have it at the same nation over and over again anyway, which means there should be a few nations that gets better eventually with some chances to host it.

very right - I agree to what is mentioned by you
the country should be rich and they should love soccer - I think Canada and americans are not much bigger fans than Arabs - for Arab scorr is their life line

[Sithara007]

It's actually going to be four countries, not just one. Uruguay, Argentina, Chile, and Paraguay are bidding for the 2030 World Cup.

If they actually get it, it would be an awkward South American qualification. There are 10 teams, and from the next world cup there will be 6 directly qualified teams with one going to playoffs.

With 4 South American countries qualified as hosts, and 6 directly qualifying, that would mean the whole continent would qualify for that world cup, without a single qualifying match needed.

What a load of BS?

If the joint bid from Uruguay–Argentina–Chile–Paraguay wins the hosting rights for FIFA World Cup 2030, then a total of only 6 teams will participate in that tournament from the CONMEBOL region. Out of the 48 participants, 6 are supposed to come from this confederation. And if they win hosting rights, then 4 out of the 6 slots will be reserved for the hosts, while the non-hosting countries within CONMEBOL will participate in the qualifier tournament from which the remaining 2 slots will be decided. So let's be clear about it. A total of 6 teams will be from CONMEBOL, and not 10 as you are claiming.

[Strongkored]

I think the three countries hosting the world cup can be a better experience for 2026 but since the main host for the world cup is in America and most of the world cup games are in America I guess because of the potential they have in America, we are going to have a better experience in 2026 world cup.

The advantage is that of the three countries that will host the World Cup in 2026, two of them already have experience in how to host a major event such as the World Cup, and the United States will be the host for the second time as well as Mexico, even for the U.S. they have the experience in terms of hosting another event that is not less big because it is followed by many countries that are the Olympics. The experience that these two countries have will make the organization well organized so that it is comfortable not only for the spectators who will be present in their country to watch the match but especially for the players who will attend and play because they need it to be able to focus and maximize in every performance.

Of the three countries that will be the organizers, I think only the national team of Mexico and the United States will be able to gain a lot at this big event later, so it is very likely for both of them to get to the quarter-finals, while Canada will be a little different fate and if they want to a good thing they must make their national team grow from now on so that they can compete more later, but I am pretty sure they as the host will get a little ease in the draw and the support of the public will give the opportunity to these three countries to compete with the other countries in favor.

IT will be surly very expensive to have visas and accomodation at three different countries
People would visit a place of two - most of the people will be middle class like me they won't be able to afford the 3 country stay

Why do you have to visit 3 countries?, I think if you intend to watch the world cup matches live because your country's national team will play, just look at the group phase where your country will be based camp, after that if they can advance to the next round then the United States is the choice because this country has a larger portion of organizing matches than the other two countries, but if you don't have the funds for that then it's actually not a problem because matches will always be broadcast live and that's enough in my opinion because I will like that too.

[Sithara007]

Why do you have to visit 3 countries?, I think if you intend to watch the world cup matches live because your country's national team will play, just look at the group phase where your country will be based camp, after that if they can advance to the next round then the United States is the choice because this country has a larger portion of organizing matches than the other two countries, but if you don't have the funds for that then it's actually not a problem because matches will always be broadcast live and that's enough in my opinion because I will like that too.

That is not a fair argument. There are millions of football fans around the world, who want to watch the world cup matches in person rather than on television. And conducting the tournament in three countries instead of one complicates things for them. The last time world cup was co-hosted was in 2002, when the matches were staged in Japan and South Korea. Even then, the distance between venues were manageable. But that is not the case with USA and Canada. Boston to San Francisco is close to 5,000 km and even by air it will take 6-7 hours. And then there are visa requirements to travel in the US. Getting a US visa can be very difficult.

[nullama]

~snip~
What a load of BS?

If the joint bid from Uruguay–Argentina–Chile–Paraguay wins the hosting rights for FIFA World Cup 2030, then a total of only 6 teams will participate in that tournament from the CONMEBOL region. Out of the 48 participants, 6 are supposed to come from this confederation. And if they win hosting rights, then 4 out of the 6 slots will be reserved for the hosts, while the non-hosting countries within CONMEBOL will participate in the qualifier tournament from which the remaining 2 slots will be decided. So let's be clear about it. A total of 6 teams will be from CONMEBOL, and not 10 as you are claiming.

I went back to read the official rules. Things have changed!

In Korea-Japan 2002, there were 3 countries that qualified automatically: South Korea and Japan as hosts, and France as the current champion (they won France 1998).

In the past, when a country won the world cup, they qualified automatically for the next world cup, but that is no longer the case:

In 2001 FIFA ended automatic qualification of the reigning champion

Brazil ended up winning the Korea-Japan 2002 tournament, but they didn't qualify directly for the 2006 world cup(they still qualified through the normal channel though).

Also, there used to be an extra qualifying slot for the host country. For example, Brazil hosted the 2014 World Cup, so they qualified directly.

So, for the 2014 World Cup CONMEBOL had 4.5 slots, but 6 countries qualified. Brazil as hosts, Argentina, Colombia, Ecuador, and Chile as directly qualified in the tournament, and Uruguay after the playoffs.

Until now, the hosting country used to get an extra slot, but for the next world cup this will change:

However, in a change of format from previous World Cups, there would be no dedicated host country slot, with the slots of automatically qualifying host countries now taken from the quota of its confederation

So, yeah, theoretically speaking, if they have the 4 countries in CONMEBOL hosting the 2030 world cup, they would only have 2 direct slots left (and an extra one for playoffs for a maximum total of 7 countries qualified). Although it would be a strange qualifier then, I'm sure they will change the rules again by that time, as they keep doing it.

[Leviathan.007]

I think the three countries hosting the world cup can be a better experience for 2026 but since the main host for the world cup is in America and most of the world cup games are in America I guess because of the potential they have in America, we are going to have a better experience in 2026 world cup.

The advantage is that of the three countries that will host the World Cup in 2026, two of them already have experience in how to host a major event such as the World Cup, and the United States will be the host for the second time as well as Mexico, even for the U.S. they have the experience in terms of hosting another event that is not less big because it is followed by many countries that are the Olympics. The experience that these two countries have will make the organization well organized so that it is comfortable not only for the spectators who will be present in their country to watch the match but especially for the players who will attend and play because they need it to be able to focus and maximize in every performance.

Of the three countries that will be the organizers, I think only the national team of Mexico and the United States will be able to gain a lot at this big event later, so it is very likely for both of them to get to the quarter-finals, while Canada will be a little different fate and if they want to a good thing they must make their national team grow from now on so that they can compete more later, but I am pretty sure they as the host will get a little ease in the draw and the support of the public will give the opportunity to these three countries to compete with the other countries in favor.

IT will be surly very expensive to have visas and accomodation at three different countries
People would visit a place of two - most of the people will be middle class like me they won't be able to afford the 3 country stay

Why do you have to visit 3 countries?, I think if you intend to watch the world cup matches live because your country's national team will play, just look at the group phase where your country will be based camp, after that if they can advance to the next round then the United States is the choice because this country has a larger portion of organizing matches than the other two countries, but if you don't have the funds for that then it's actually not a problem because matches will always be broadcast live and that's enough in my opinion because I will like that too.

In fact, the details for hosting the world and which games are going to be hosted in which countries is not been officially announced yet and I think there is the possibility for any country to play only one country that's how the team won't have to visit three countries to play the gages and the fan should visit all the three countries too.

[piebeyb]

Why do you have to visit 3 countries?, I think if you intend to watch the world cup matches live because your country's national team will play, just look at the group phase where your country will be based camp, after that if they can advance to the next round then the United States is the choice because this country has a larger portion of organizing matches than the other two countries, but if you don't have the funds for that then it's actually not a problem because matches will always be broadcast live and that's enough in my opinion because I will like that too.

That is not a fair argument. There are millions of football fans around the world, who want to watch the world cup matches in person rather than on television. And conducting the tournament in three countries instead of one complicates things for them. The last time world cup was co-hosted was in 2002, when the matches were staged in Japan and South Korea. Even then, the distance between venues were manageable. But that is not the case with USA and Canada. Boston to San Francisco is close to 5,000 km and even by air it will take 6-7 hours. And then there are visa requirements to travel in the US. Getting a US visa can be very difficult.

I think for events in these 3 countries of course the participating countries will provide convenience whether it's visa requirements during the world cup, so there's no problem for that anyway if everything is complicated then it won't be held for this world cup event in 3 countries, it's just In my opinion, it is impossible for the organizers to make complicated permits and requirements for world cup spectators.

So there's no need to worry about permits and visa requirements because of course FIFA will also prepare easy access for spectators to enjoy this world cup event which is being held in 3 countries at once.

[TopTort777]

IT will be surly very expensive to have visas and accomodation at three different countries
People would visit a place of two - most of the people will be middle class like me they won't be able to afford the 3 country stay

I dont think that fans will have to visit all three country to watch their teams play during preliminaries, playoff and finals. Take IIHF World Championship 2023 as example, it is held in two countries also, two countries that are separated by sea, but finals will be held only in one country. It might even be, that during preliminaries, playoff and finals, two team will not even leave country.

Watching sports live is always expensive, but such tournaments happens only once a year or two, so you have plenty of time to save money, do booking research and get best offer. Average class watch such tournaments at home. I think an average fan can afford only few tickets, but only wealthy person visit all games, so visas, accommodation and tickets wont be problem for him.

[temple]

Why do you have to visit 3 countries?, I think if you intend to watch the world cup matches live because your country's national team will play, just look at the group phase where your country will be based camp, after that if they can advance to the next round then the United States is the choice because this country has a larger portion of organizing matches than the other two countries, but if you don't have the funds for that then it's actually not a problem because matches will always be broadcast live and that's enough in my opinion because I will like that too.

That is not a fair argument. There are millions of football fans around the world, who want to watch the world cup matches in person rather than on television. And conducting the tournament in three countries instead of one complicates things for them. The last time world cup was co-hosted was in 2002, when the matches were staged in Japan and South Korea. Even then, the distance between venues were manageable. But that is not the case with USA and Canada. Boston to San Francisco is close to 5,000 km and even by air it will take 6-7 hours. And then there are visa requirements to travel in the US. Getting a US visa can be very difficult.

I confess that I don't have an idea how the average fan goes about visiting tournaments like the World Cup. Are they applying for one game and then go there and spend some time in the country or city? Probably yes because can you even apply for multiple games? If you do, is it likely that you win several ticket lotteries and how do you know which one you are going to win?

When a World Cup game is played in California and a fan from Europe wants to attend that game, a long-haul flight has to be booked to in order to watch that game assuming that the fan won the ticket lottery beforehand.

What exactly is the problem now with three countries co-hosting a World Cup? If a fan from Mexico wants to watch the final and the final takes place in the US, the fan has to travel to the US the same way a fan from Europe has to travel to the US. What is the difference in the planning procedure for any fan from any place when they decide to watch a game?

Visa could be one reason, but I think that the US won't make it unnecessarily hard to get one. If a fan from Washington wants to watch a game in California, that is a hell of a ride. Except for the visa procedure, traveling from Washington to California is at least as exhausting as traveling from Mexico to California unless you are from the deepest South of Mexico.