FIFA released its guide to the 2026 World Cup bidding process this week, which, on the surface at least, promises a democratic and transparent way of deciding who gets to host the first 48-team World Cup in the tournament’s history.
That is a welcome change. When choosing the hosts of previous World Cups, technical reports and the suitability of a country to actually host the tournament were thrown out the window when it came round to the Executive Committee’s vote, with Qatar, ranked as "high risk" in one of the technical report's categories, coming out on top for the 2022 World Cup.
The new bidding process for the 2026 World Cup should be music to the ears of the United Bid Committee, representing the U.S., Mexico and Canada. The North American bid will score highly on most of the technical categories, with great infrastructure and opportunities for FIFA to rake in commercial revenue, not to mention enough stadiums to probably host a 200-team tournament. While the U.S. national team shocked the world on the pitch by managing to miss out on next year’s World Cup in what is probably the easiest confederation to qualify from, surely it won’t also miss out on a chance to host, along with Canada and Mexico, the 2026 World Cup.
But North America’s bid isn’t the only one on the table, and when it comes to international voting, it pays to not count your chickens before they hatch. Morocco may seem like a distant outsider, but there are plenty of reasons why North America shouldn’t get too complacent.
First, the bidding for the 2026 World Cup is decided by a vote of all 211 FIFA member states. Ahmed Ahmed, the Malagasy head of the African Football Confederation, has already pledged his support for Morocco’s bid, and it’s likely that a lot of African nations, which make up about a quarter of the total votes, and other Arabic-speaking nations will support Morocco.
It’s assumed that Europe will generally back the North American bid, but the continent has reason to back Morocco, as the short distance and similar time zones between Europe and Morocco make it more practical for European fans to enjoy the World Cup than they would if it were held on the other side of the Atlantic. Of course, it’s not the fans who vote, and soccer’s governing body often ignores their wishes. Either way, the voting will be much closer than the landslide victory some North Americans might expect.
Before the vote, each bid is assessed by the technical committee, but Morocco is unlikely to fall down here. It didn’t have any glaring problems in its 2010 World Cup bid, with decent stadiums, excellent infrastructure and a hotel sector described by FIFA as "first rate." If this were a 32-team World Cup then Morocco’s bid would have no problems at all, as shown by their 2010 bid. 48 teams is a big step up, but given Spain and Portugal’s proximity, teams could base themselves on the Iberian Peninsula, which European clubs often use for pre-season fitness camps due to the world-class facilities on offer.
FIFA President Gianni Infantino has already said that Morocco is capable of hosting the competition, and they have hosted the Club World Cup, FIFA’s showcase club competition, twice before in 2013 and 2014. Former FIFA head Sepp Blatter, not that his opinion counts for much these days, also hinted he was in favor of Morocco's bid, claiming the North America bid 'doesn't work'.
Many Americans feel the U.S. deserves to host the World Cup in 2026 because they were "cheated" out of the 2022 World Cup, but there have also been allegations suggesting that Morocco was cheated out of the 2010 World Cup which went to South Africa, with claims that the Morocco bid actually got the most votes. Also, the USA has already hosted the World Cup, and Mexico has hosted it twice. Given FIFA’s remit to try and spread football to new regions of the world, a North African World Cup may have a lot of support from inside FIFA.
Morocco’s bid still has plenty of question marks over it, from the dismal human rights situation in Western Sahara, which is occupied by Morocco, to its widely criticized decision to pull out of hosting the African Cup of Nations in 2015 over fears of Ebola -- the competition was played that year in Equatorial Guinea instead. While Morocco looks capable of hosting a 32 team world cup, the tournament’s expansion might be a step too far for the nation. Morocco isn’t as wealthy as South Africa or Brazil, and its economy may struggle to digest the ever-increasing costs of hosting soccer's top tournament.
But despite these problems, FIFA politics is unpredictable, even if it does become more transparent. Although North America’s bid still looks the heavy favorite to win the rights to host the 2026 World Cup, while Morocco are in the running, the United Bid Committee can’t afford to be complacent.
Share This Post
