[dropcap]R[/dropcap]ight now is a major time in the world of football, aka soccer (and hereafter called football to keep fans of ‘the beautiful game’ happy). This past week has seen the Caribbean family following the 2018 World Cup in Russia, looking to cheer on neighbours across the Caribbean Sea in Panama, Mexico and Colombia, alongside admiring the giants of the game like Brazil, Argentina and Germany.
As well as news from Russia, recent days have also seen news break that the Americas will host the Cup in 2026. A winning joint-bid by the United States, Canada and Mexico will see a North American World Cup for the first time since the United States hosted the event in 1994.
Everyone loves a great sporting party – and many in the Caribbean will look forward to a ‘flow on’ bump in the tourism business – but what does 2026 really mean for our region? Should we view this news as a blueprint to build our own bid for a major event like the World Cup? Or, in this time and era, is hosting a major event a far greater risk than any reward it may bring?
THE 2026 WORLD CUP
The 2026 World Cup will be a notable event for many reasons. The Cup has had joint hosts prior, with Japan and South Korea splitting duties in 2002, but never have three nations shared the honours. The US will host 60 matches (including finals), Canada and Mexico 10 each. All up, it’s hoped the Cup will bring $5 billion of new economic activity, and up to $4 billion minus costs.
There is, of course, the elephant in the room: the Trump era has seen relations fray between the three North American nations over NAFTA and other disputes. Fans of Trump say he is balancing the scales on relations; critics say he is a wrecking ball. Either way, while Trump will not be president by 2026, many will be nervous for the years of planning ahead. Even if going with the lone other host bid from Morocco didn’t have the glam and oomph of a three-way bid.
Before the bid Trump even went so far as to give personal assurance to FIFA that he would not seek to obstruct the visa process for teams, officials and fans coming to the US in 2026.
Beyond the highly politicised relations, 2026 will also bring new controversy elsewhere. The number of teams will expand from 32 to 48, risking further the quality of play at a knockout tournament. Many games in the current World Cup – like Portugal vs Spain, Australia vs France, and Germany vs Mexico – have been competitive affairs. Others games far less so. It’s wonderful that more nations will participate but it risks viewership if competition becomes truly uneven.
2026’s dynamics are unique, yet doubt over the value of major events is a constant in this era.
THE IMPLICATIONS
Once upon a time winning the right to host a major sporting event was massive news; highly prized and truly desired. Yet recent years have come to see hosting major events like the Olympics as akin to a poison pill – one even more unwelcome due to the challenging economic times we live in. It’s true, though, that there have been pockets of success.
Barcelona’s hosting of the 1992 Olympic Games is widely viewed as a tremendous success. Major infrastructure was built, and since then the city has gone from strength to strength as a global sporting capital.
The same with Sydney 2000, and London 2012. The former showcased a confident and cosmopolitan city ready for a new millenium; the latter reaffirmed what the world loves about ‘The Big Smoke’.
Other hosts, like Athens in 2004, Beijing in 2008 and Rio in 2016 have had mixed results. Many articles could be written on the reasons. In brief, Athens encountered financial troubles, Rio political upheaval, and Beijing the CPC’s sometimes odorous use of the Games as a propaganda piece, but all share a common issue. Cities and nations that seek to use the games as a launch pad may find it’s more like quick sand. Similar history is seen in other major events, and the Caribbean has experienced this too.
THE LOCAL EQUATION
The West Indies hosting of the Cricket World Cup in 2007 was a great success in many ways. It showcased local athletes on home turf as well as impassioned fans and outstanding volunteers who gave their time to ensure every cricket fan enjoyed the best of Caribbean hospitality. As with all who work to make a major event a success, such great contributions must always be acknowledged.
The US will host 60 matches (including finals), Canada and Mexico 10 each. All up, it’s hoped the Cup will bring $5 billion of new economic activity, and up to $4 billion minus costs
Yet these contributions do not, by default, require a major event to shine. Many who would regard 2007 as a template for future major events in the region will need to think carefully. It’s clear that Caribbean nations will deliver the goods when it comes to being great hosts; it’s far from clear what enduring economic benefits they will gain from hosting a major event once again.
It’s true that public investment in the Caribbean has had a mixed record of success, mirroring the results of many host cities and nations. Part of this is owed to a local strength: a private sector tourism industry that entices people the world over. Many cities seek a major event to ‘put them on the map’ but the family of Caribbean nations is already among the most beloved in the world.
