Elephants In The Room
As the football world enters 2026, here are three major concerns for football, each a proverbial ‘elephant in the room’.
READ MORE: World Cup ’94 vs World Cup ’26 by Coach Ralph Ferrigno
SUBSCRIBE & FOLLOW: YouTube / X (Formerly Twitter) / Instagram / TikTok / Patreon / BlueSky
WORLD CUP 2026
World Cup year! A second World Cup in North America and the USA!! Why am I not bubbling over with excitement and anticipation? I was there in 1994 for the US World Cup #1. Then, the world’s game was finally coming to these shores. Soccer, football to the rest of the world, was not even a second-class citizen in the USA. The 1994 World Cup helped to change things. It was a success, boosting the sport stateside with its record attendances. A stable professional league, Major League Soccer, soon followed.
Today, the American soccer system may not be perfect, but it is gradually becoming a force in the US sporting landscape. Fans hope this year’s Cup may take things to a new level. Hopefully, it will, but does it change the fact that I, and many other football fans in the USA, don’t feel the way we did 32 years ago?
In ‘94, I was at Foxborough when Maradona stuck his crazed face in the television camera during his final World Cup hurrah. I watched as Baggio heroically pulled Italy out of the fire against Nigeria. This time around, Foxborough will host Mbappé vs. Haaland, and England and Scotland will be in town. I would love to be there, but like many other real footy fans, I won’t. Ridiculous ticket prices will exclude many genuine fans from attending. The greed of FIFA president Gianni Infantino has no limits. The price to park a car at the stadium will exceed the general ticket price paid in ’94. Incidentally, FIFA scoops up all the parking proceeds, just one example of perhaps the biggest cash grab in the sport’s history.
AMERICAN SCOUSER TAKES ANFIELD
Further, Infantino’s politicisation of FIFA, supposedly an organisation of no political affiliation, is reaching new heights. After FIFA chose controversial World Cup hosts, Russia 2018 and Qatar 2022, did last summer’s Club World Cup Final provide us with a glimpse of what we might expect this summer? Historically, the politicised 1936 Berlin Olympics were a signpost of what was to come. Berlin was not in our lifetime, but might the World Cup ’26 eventually play a similar role? At present, the country is spiralling out of control internally and externally. The current administration will interfere with the competition if it suits its agenda. Some speculate that the numerous ongoing controversies might make World Cup ’26 a prime target for terrorists. Politics may be superseding the sport.
It is admirable that many in the media are putting a positive spin on the buildup to this year’s proceedings. Still, it’s hard to ignore these issues. Doubtless, when the ball is in play, I will somehow get into the game I love. At the same time, as someone involved in American soccer day to day, it is difficult to deny that a second North American World Cup does not feel the same as it did in 1994. I am not excited. It should not be this way.
THE 115
Whatever happened to Manchester City and their 115 charges? When the club came under UAE ownership, it appeared that the new owners’ desire to reach the top quickly knew no bounds. The City Group had financial power and was prepared to use it, either within or outside the rules. Manchester City subsequently went on an unparalleled run of success and domination. The Premier League finally tried to bring them to task three years ago. They were not the first. UEFA had earlier brought charges, but was frustrated by the statute of limitations. City won on that occasion, though the Court of Arbitration for Sport noted their lack of cooperation.
Since the EPL brought the charges, little has happened beyond closed doors. We have had delay after delay, and from a distance, that appears to have been the aim of the City Group. City’s owners have used the time to redevelop their “campus,” ensuring future funds within the rules to keep their unparalleled dominance of English football on track.
LIVERPOOL VS. CITY
Moreover, the ownership has continued undeterred, spending substantially even though it is supposedly under the financial microscope. In the Pep Guardiola era, Manchester has spent in excess of £1.75 bn. In the last year, the club has bought 14 players at great expense, and if the newspapers are to be believed, they are prepared to fork out the necessary money to bring in Eliot Anderson and Marc Guehi in the January window. Whilst it may seem reasonable to assert ‘innocent until proven guilty’, there are just too many charges on the docket to make the observer feel something has been amiss along the way. Once again, there is an alleged lack of cooperation by the City Group.
The truth is that when charges like these are brought, certain financial activities, notably transfers, should be frozen until the matter is resolved. It might provide greater motivation to resolve matters quickly. Ultimately, the Manchester City case needs to be sorted. My belief is that the competitive integrity of the Premier League rests upon the 115. However, given the way things are going, is there ever going to be a resolution to the 115, one way or another, in 2026 or ever?
VAR
And finally, our dear old friend VAR. Let’s not beat about the bush; it has been a lovely toy for the refereeing fraternity to play with. The VAR system, as they have employed it, has not improved the game. We were told VAR was introduced to prevent “Hand of God” goals and to intervene when something blatantly obvious was missed. If goal-line technology, for example, failed. Instead, we have had VAR effectively refereeing the games. Add in the “clear and obvious error” fallacy. It’s an approach that appears to be designed more to bolster the credibility of the official over making the correct call. Any chance we can do away with this nonsense?
Here is one simple improvement, amongst many, that can help the use of this technology: don’t use VAR to analyse every goal scored. Goals are being called back due to relatively minor infractions in the buildup that nobody notices or cares about. It isn’t improving the game, it’s spoiling it!!
Overall, VAR might be simplified by giving each team a couple of challenges, tennis-style. The coaching staff follows the game on their iPads. They should be in a position to use challenges if appropriate. If a bogus challenge is made, they lose a challenge. Wouldn’t this be simpler than VAR officials butting in constantly when they are not needed?
SHOP THE AMERICAN SCOUSER COLLECTION TODAY
As many point out, it is not VAR that is the problem, but those operating it. In the final analysis, refereeing needs an overhaul. Times have changed, and the days of the ref’s word being final have long gone. The game should adapt accordingly. Minimise the use of VAR, and accept that even with technology, decision-making will never be perfect. However, I think the VAR system can be employed better if used sparingly. It may also encourage officials to officiate rather than rely on the technology so much.
It’s gobbledygook we don’t need. Football has long been proclaimed as “The Simplest Game.” Let’s let it be so. Is it a mere coincidence that this weekend’s FA Cup games, with no VAR, featured considerably less controversy? In my book, that is ‘clear and obvious’.
So, three elephants in the room for the football fan in 2026. Whether each will ever be resolved satisfactorily remains to be seen.
My advice: don’t hold your breath!
YNWA