Infantino’s reforms reveal flawed leadership choices

The 2026 World Cup will be the largest and most complex tournament in history. It will span three countries: Canada, Mexico, and the United States. The event will include 48 teams and feature a host nation in diplomatic tension with another qualifier, Iran. The most notable imbalance lies in FIFA’s priorities.

A former senior football official stated the federation operates under an uneven principle: all stakeholders hold equal status, but some carry more weight. Broadcasters and sponsors rank highest. Fans face rising ticket prices and visa barriers, while players will compete in extreme heat with limited input on scheduling.

The planning fallacy and an unnecessary halftime show

FIFA president Gianni Infantino has cited the Super Bowl as a model for the World Cup’s commercial goals. His latest plan includes a 25-minute halftime show during the final, featuring Shakira, Madonna, and BTS. The aim is to mimic the spectacle of America’s biggest sporting event, though the comparison fails under scrutiny.

Kieran Maguire, a football finance expert at Liverpool University, called the Super Bowl analogy misleading. The World Cup is a global event, not a domestic one. Fans travel from around the world, often at high cost. A supporter from Ghana, where the average monthly wage is around £110, would need to spend at least £170 for a single ticket. Maguire noted the Super Bowl occurs in one city over a single day, while the World Cup lasts a month across three countries. The logistics and expenses differ entirely.

Simon Chadwick, professor of AfroEurasian Sport at Emlyon Business School, recognized the financial reasoning behind FIFA’s entertainment push. The U.S. represents roughly a third of the global sports economy, with the most advanced consumer market. Chadwick said FIFA must evolve beyond bureaucracy to remain relevant. However, the federation risks alienating the fans who made the sport commercially successful. He warned that the passion and atmosphere attracting sponsors are fading, and most sports now struggle to keep fans engaged.

The tournament’s schedule also disregards player safety. Matches will be played in conditions exceeding the Wet Bulb Globe Temperature (WBGT) threshold of 28°C, a level meteorologists agree poses serious health risks. FIFA set its limit at 32°C WBGT, requiring only three-minute cooling breaks per half. A leading American climate scientist stated that short breaks cannot mitigate the danger once heat stress passes certain thresholds.

Related: Women in Leadership Power List 2025 Winners

The endowment effect and a future 64-team World Cup

Before the 48-team tournament begins, Infantino suggested expanding to 64 teams in the future. The proposal reflects a bias where leaders grow overly attached to their ideas. Business professor Jeanne M. Liedtka identified this as the “endowment effect.”

The expansion also introduced challenges. Fans from some nations are unlikely to secure U.S. visas. The tournament’s scale—104 matches across three countries—has strained resources. Maguire questioned whether added teams could truly participate if fans cannot travel or players face exhaustion.

Infantino’s decisions often appear driven by pe

Ticket pricing remains contentious. Infantino defended dynamic pricing, arguing the U.S. market demands it. He claimed attending a college game in the U.S. costs at least $300. The statement was incorrect—Ticketmaster estimates NBA games can be seen for $100—and irrelevant. The World Cup is not an American sports league. The outlet estimated a full set of tickets for England’s three group-stage matches would cost £2,185. The best seats for the final could exceed £24,000.

Chadwick explained dynamic pricing should adjust based on demand. In theory, unsold inventory would lead to lower prices. However, overseas fans must commit to travel months in advance, locking in high costs before any correction occurs. The result is empty seats and frustrated supporters.

FIFA’s approach often prioritizes revenue over tradition. Maguire described the federation’s strategy as an attempt to Disneyfy the sport. Every interaction is designed to extract spending. The organization projects $12-13 billion in revenue from the 2026 tournament, with $11.7 billion allocated to its 211 member associations. No independent audit verifies how those funds are spent. The financial outlook is already uncertain, as broadcasting rights in China and India are expected to sell for far less than the $350 million FIFA initially forecast.

Related: Microsoft Stock Falls on Disappointing Earnings Report

Despite claims of global inclusion, the 2026 World Cup appears tailored for the wealthy. American lawyer Michael J. Epstein stated that if access requires absorbing inflated costs at every level, the event ceases to be a global celebration and becomes a premium experience for those who can afford it.

A governing body resistant to change

When Infantino became FIFA president in 2016, he pledged to restore the federation’s reputation after years of corruption and mismanagement. He succeeded in one area: funding. Payments to member associations rose by 30% since 2022. Transparency remains lacking. His $6 million salary and bonuses for 2025 are public, but the cost of his homes in Florida and Switzerland is not. FIFA covers $5,000 monthly for his daughter’s education in Miami.

Liedtka described a tendency where leaders favor facts supporting their preferred solutions. Infantino exemplifies this. The uncontested award of the 2034 World Cup to Saudi Arabia followed his push to shorten the bidding window to 25 days, bypassing standard governance practices. The decision coincided with Saudi Arabia’s acquisition of a 10% stake in broadcaster Dazn, which paid $1 billion for the rights to the 2025 Club World Cup.

FIFA’s governance has always leaned autocratic. Many sporting federations, founded in the 19th century, operate outside modern corporate norms. Infantino took this further. The new World Club Cup trophy bears an inscription: “Inspired by Gianni Infantino.” Even his predecessors avoided such self-promotion.

The 2026 World Cup may succeed or collapse under its own ambition. Either way, it will illustrate how leadership biases distort decisions. At its core, the tournament appears designed not for fans or players, but for the stakeholders Infantino values most.