AccaMate logo

Football News

Latest Sports Stories

Filtered by tag:World CupClear filter
England need fearless passers and three Tuchel omissions may point the way

Football News

England need fearless passers and three Tuchel omissions may point the way

Technical class in the fiercest battles was again lacking at the World Cup but there is hope amid the soul-searchingThe post-match inquest into England’s elimination was almost over when Thomas Tuchel offered a revealing analysis of Argentina’s knack of instigating late comebacks at this World Cup.“In their culture, ball possession plays a crucial role. It starts from a young age,” he said. “That is in the DNA and it demands a lot of self-confidence – natural self‑confidence to always want the ball, to always be in the gaps, to always define yourself through the ball. I think that is a crucial thing: to show courage.”This time, it wasn’t meant as a dig at his own players. But after the latest example of England surrendering a lead that can be traced all the way back to the 2002 World Cup in Japan, when Michael Owen scored in the 23rd minute against Brazil before the team tried to defend for their lives and failed, there was no avoiding the underlying message.Despite the Football Association’s best efforts to produce players who are able to “intelligently dominate possession” as outlined when it launched its “England DNA philosophy” at St George’s Park back in December 2014, there is still a shortage of top-class central midfielders with the technical skills required to win a World Cup semi-final.Tuchel’s epitaph for this tournament will be the statistic that England had only 12% of possession between Anthony Gordon opening the scoring in the 55th minute and Lautaro Martínez’s winner in the second minute of stoppage time. Equally as damning is that, of the 39 passes they attempted in that period, 12 came from the goalkeeper, Jordan Pickford, while only five took place in Argentina’s half.That indicates – as well as there being a lack of forward runners to put the pressure back on opponents that included a 38-year-old Nicolás Otamendi in defence for the last 20 minutes – that England were unable to play their way out of trouble when Argentina pressed high up the pitch and ended up giving the ball straight back.“England teams sense changing moments in the game both in and out of possession, reacting instinctively and intelligently,” reads the DNA philosophy that was devised by Dan Ashworth, who was the FA’s director of elite development in 2014. Ashworth returned to St George’s Park last May after his ill-fated spell as Manchester United’s sporting director. He had left the FA for Brighton in 2019 before moving to Newcastle three years later.His remit after returning last May in the newly created role of chief football officer to work alongside the technical director, John McDermott, was to oversee the regeneration of the National Football Centre as well as “building the long-term systems that underpin the FA’s performance ambitions”. In other words, find a way of playing without fear when it really comes to the crunch.“We felt them going backwards and backwards rather than going forward,” said the Argentina goalkeeper, Emiliano Martínez. “Sometimes when you are winning, you have to go forward anyway. You can’t change the gameplan.”While the academy system in England has become the envy of most countries given the resources at the disposal of Premier League clubs, it has still not found a way of producing technically gifted players who are capable of running games from midfield. But there have been signs that things may be starting to change.Elliot Anderson has emerged as an England first-choice over the past 12 months and Manchester City’s £116m summer signing is at the forefront of a new generation of midfielders who look capable of mixing it with the best at the European Championship in two years’ time on home soil.Manchester United supporters are still scratching their heads over Kobbie Mainoo’s lack of game time given his skill set was a key factor in their revival under Michael Carrick in the second half of last season. Mainoo’s inclusion alongside Jordan Henderson as the back-ups to Anderson and Declan Rice meant there was no place in the squad for either Bournemouth’s Alex Scott or Myles Lewis-Skelly of Arsenal.It could be argued that they were the two in-form midfielders in the country during the final month of the Premier League season, with Scott – who formed a winning partnership with Anderson at last summer’s European Under-21 Championship – standing out in Bournemouth’s win over Arsenal and draw with Manchester City that ended up defining the title race.Lewis-Skelly’s chances of being selected for the World Cup seemed remote when he lost his place as England’s first-choice left-back. Yet after returning as an all-action midfielder who kept Spain’s Martín Zubimendi out of the Arsenal team for the title run-in and excelled against Paris Saint‑Germain midfield in the Champions League final, the 19-year-old could have provided exactly what Tuchel described as a “natural self‑confidence to always want the ball”.Both look destined to play important roles for England, although whether that is the case with Mainoo or Adam Wharton will be intriguing to see.Like Anderson, Scott and Angel Gomes – the former United playmaker who was handed a shock call-up by Lee Carsley in 2024 – Wharton began his career as a No 10 before shifting to a deeper role. Tuchel does not seem to trust the Crystal Palace midfielder but he has the passing range and ability to unlock defences, not to mention a confidence and swagger on the ball that can’t be taught.As Ashworth and co contemplate another round of soul-searching, the answers to England’s prayers may already be here.

Ed Aarons in MiamiFri, 17 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
Concacaf whistleblower Mel Brennan: ‘Fifa survived Blatter and Warner. It will survive Infantino too’

Football News

Concacaf whistleblower Mel Brennan: ‘Fifa survived Blatter and Warner. It will survive Infantino too’

Ex-Concacaf executive Mel Brennan reflects on the Fifa corruption scandal, missed reforms and why football’s governance remains stubbornly opaqueMel Brennan has seen every level of world football. “I know what the World Cup looks like from the 17th floor of Trump Tower … I know what it looks like from a grass-strewn field in Trinidad where children cannot play because money that was supposed to maintain it went somewhere else entirely,” he says.Brennan worked as an executive at Concacaf during the corrupt reign of its infamous former president Jack Warner and the late general secretary Chuck Blazer, who once helped run the organization from Trump Tower.Brennan was also a confidential source for investigative journalists and law enforcement as they looked into the corruption that was rife within the organization for decades. Brennan’s book about his time at Concacaf, Fixing Football is out now.“Football survived Sepp Blatter,” he writes, optimistically, in the book. “It survived Jack Warner. It survived Chuck Blazer. And it will survive Gianni Infantino.”The Guardian sat down with Brennan to talk about Fifa, Concacaf and the future of the game.Were you surprised when law enforcement raided a Zurich hotel and Concacaf headquarters in Miami in 2015 to indict so many Fifa and Concacaf officials? No. The FBI had stopped and started dialog with me about what was going on at Concacaf. On two separate occasions I was on my way to New York to [meet] with investigators and they said “Wait – we’re not quite ready”. I literally turned my car around. So I knew something was percolating. On the other hand I never really thought there would be comeuppance with this group.Why did you think there would be no accountability for Concacaf bosses after everything you saw while working there?When I was with Concacaf the office was on the 17th floor of Trump Tower. Chuck Blazer lived on the 49th floor. Before that, Chuck and Jack Warner shared an apartment on the 10th floor across from Donald Trump and Marla Maples. They were all so intertwined and so much a part of the interlocking elite that accountability was a distant dream. I would imagine that Chuck, Jack, and others would do anything to stay out of jail. These were not gangsters. These were opportunistic cockroaches. They were not tough guys. They would run with any real sustained sunlight. [Chuck Blazer became an undercover informant for FBI and IRS investigators in 2011.]Were you surprised Concacaf featured so prominently in the 2015 scandals?No. I felt like Concacaf was among the least competent of the continental actors. You had other confederations with people who were European glitterati or ran legitimate businesses but you didn’t really have that in Concacaf. Jack was a former history teacher but he knew that the Caribbean was a sleeping giant that could subvert the Guatemalan-Mexican football power structure at the time. And you had Chuck who was an extractor but you couldn’t really point to a lot that he had built. They were not sophisticated corporate guys. They were not sophisticated business guys. They were born opportunists. That the mistakes were so easily revealed to law enforcement was not a surprise.Blazer and Warner had tight control over Concacaf but there are usually always enablers in these environments. Was that the case at Concacaf?In a larger sense, all of us were enablers but I think that the Concacaf executive committee and the Concacaf member associations would have made a different choice with different political pressure at the time. From 1990 to about 2015 they were operating within a North American context where the world’s sport was sixth or seventh on the media table. It was arguable that wrestling had more media attention. So the media landscape also has to take its fair share of the blame. Often folks would want to maintain access and instead of doing investigative journalism that requires document review and truth-telling, and speaking truth to power, it was more reporting and more like Pravda rather than “the institution said this now lets’s really dig in to see if this is true or not and if it is not true why didn’t they tell us the truth?” There was not a lot of that in the LA Times or the New York Times. Everybody played a role in enabling this.So Blazer and Warner lined their pockets with cash from deals they made. Why do we care how they made money? The cost was that people didn’t gain access to sporting opportunities [they were entitled to through]. The football bubble and the rise in the dollars available for them should have created access. If you are a girl and you play sport, you only have a small chance to go pro but if you play sport and you stay in sport you are more likely to lead an organization as an adult. But these types of opportunities were lost for so many because Jack and Chuck were too busy acting like they were building fields and programming but Chuck and Jack were actually on a game show called “Who is Stealing Money?”. And they were on it every week.Where was the US, Canada, and Mexico – all big players in Concacaf during this? People like [former US Soccer president ] Sunil Gulati were fully present when I was there. The role that Sunil played under [his predecessor] and then as US Soccer president himself felt more like him being a World Bank guy – which is the world he comes from. Admiring this economic engine that Chuck and Jack had built from a distance rather than deploying the power of US Soccer to shine a light on this stuff and make a difference.In your book Fixing Football you recall an amazing scene at a Concacaf conference in Miami where women, who were not delegates, left the hotel en masse at 5am. There were more than 15 and less than 30 [women]. All from the same floor. And you see how they are dressed and you see the time and see what is going on. You feel like you want to call somebody because maybe you are crazy. Everyone else who was there and had been [at Concacaf events previously] was, like, “Well, yeah, let’s get them in the car and get them off …”Has anything changed at Fifa since your era?Transparency International laid out a framework that would have [made things less opaque at Fifa]. Fifa could have meetings of the Fifa Council that are broadcast live and minutes that are in real time. We could see the bank accounts in real time if they wanted us to see it. Some cockroaches have scattered and other cockroaches came in but the overall smell remains the same.Was Victor Montagliani the right person to lead Concacaf after the 2015 crisis?Victor Montagliani had an opportunity to demonstrate he was the right person to lead. There was a moment where Concacaf could have gone in a different direction: democratic, transparent, inclusive, diverse. Instead, what Concacaf did was rely on the fact that [Montagliani] was not Jack and Chuck to say that this meant change. In the end, we still cannot see and it is not clear how Concacaf doles out its dollars. The question is, will Montagliani and other leaders step back just a moment to build something that would matter beyond themselves? That would matter for more people. I was naive to think that Montagliani could be this radical change when most of the status quo is still in place.Should Concacaf be making sponsorship deals with Saudi Arabia and accepting investment in the region from the kingdom’s Public Investment Fund?Any nation state that is murdering journalists has to be marginalized. I would not want to see Concacaf engaging with Saudi Arabia without some sort of weight to the decision-making process of sponsorships and partnerships that included human rights records and human rights abuses. How Saudi Arabia treats women and the most vulnerable matters. If Concacaf is considering a partnership with them then they should have a mechanism that is going to evaluate some of [the issues]. They might not get a deal at all but to not have those considerations in the conversation as to whether you are going to partner somebody is an abandonment of the spirit that makes sport matter at all.Does the USA, Mexico, and Canada hosting this year’s World Cup make this tournament a success for the sport in the region?It is an opportunity. [But] who gets left behind? In my local town in Maryland, all [organized] youth soccer is white kids. But a 10-minute walk from my house a park is reserved by Latino communities but these two communities don’t meet. One community is going to the Dallas Cup and the Florida youth soccer tournaments and the other one is not. There is something wrong here and there is an opportunity for us to reshape how this looks or to call for and get better answers from our leaders as to why it looks the way it looks.This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

Matthew HallFri, 17 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
More than 200 countries endorse Infantino for fourth Fifa term despite Balogun scandal

Football News

More than 200 countries endorse Infantino for fourth Fifa term despite Balogun scandal

Only a handful of FAs have not declared their supportGianni Infantino has the formal endorsement of more than 200 countries for re-election as Fifa’s president despite the climate of unrest that has swirled since the scandal surrounding Folarin Balogun’s reprieve from suspension.The Guardian understands only a handful of Fifa’s 211 member associations are still to send letters of support for Infantino, who is on course to be voted into a fourth term by a landslide at its congress in March. A small number of European countries are among the outliers, with Germany the highest-profile FA yet to provide official backing.Candidates must be put forward by 18 November, before which time letters can also be withdrawn or transferred to a different contender. But Infantino is currently the only runner and some FAs feel they have, nonetheless, come under persistent pressure from within Fifa to confirm their allegiance. In theory that should not be permitted under Fifa’s ethics code.It would take a political earthquake to dislodge Infantino. Although there remains disquiet after Donald Trump admitted lobbying Fifa to review the USA striker Balogun’s red card against Bosnia and Herzegovina, the vast majority of it is festering among European FAs and adjacent bodies. Infantino does not need to count on Europe’s support to land an overwhelming mandate and, in any case, most of the continent has confirmed its endorsement for his re-election. The English FA is among those to have sent its letter well in advance of the World Cup.The topic of a Europe-backed candidate to run against Infantino has gained legitimacy behind closed doors over the past 10 days but the prospect of multiple federations settling upon a name feels remote.Fifa’s member associations will convene in New York on Saturday although, with Infantino helming the meeting, the subject of recent scandals is unlikely to be an agenda item. The World Cup’s financial performance, and any subsequent benefits that could be passed on to the FAs, is more likely to be a topic of discussion.

Exclusive by Nick Ames and Matt Hughes in New YorkFri, 17 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
Fox’s US World Cup summer: wild mispronunciations, Corden’s sad beers and Lowe’s excellence

Football News

Fox’s US World Cup summer: wild mispronunciations, Corden’s sad beers and Lowe’s excellence

The broadcaster’s tournament coverage was a mix of flat and fizz. It could also have been a long farewell with World Cup rights up for grabsGoodbye, then, to Fox, to its band of upbeat Brits and grown men dressed in suits and sneakers. Goodbye to constant cutaways to Gianni Infantino in the stands, his eyebrows a mournful tipi, his nude head sprinkling under the summer sun. Goodbye to Landon Donovan and his special gift for announcing every celebrity sighting (“And there’s Javier Bardem and Penélope Cruz”) as if delivering the results of a colonoscopy. Goodbye to Rebecca Lowe saying “OK, OK” whenever she’s needed one of her on-set personalities to zip it so she can throw to a break. Goodbye to the momentum graph, which only flashed on screen when a match’s momentum needed no explanation; goodbye to “no golden goal” on the scorebug during extra time, referencing a rule that has not been in force at a World Cup for 24 years; goodbye to the connected ball, which never seemed connected when we needed connection most.Goodbye to Geoff Shreeves, Fox’s middle-aged Oliver Twist chirruping on the sideline for the approval of his American masters. Goodbye to Tom Rinaldi, to his pocket squares and his “lyrical” meditations on balls and planets and stars or whatever. Goodbye to Chef Nick, now forced to rein in the extravagance of his early contributions (kangaroo corndogs, fufu chicken tikka masala) in the face of the tournament’s gastronomically subdued final four. And goodbye to Jameis Winston, the Fox fan correspondent, whose distressingly antic and sweaty stadium dispatches gave him the unvarying appearance of a man being electrocuted in the middle of a baptism.Goodbye to it all: Fox has been the English-language home of the World Cup on US TV since 2018, but with the media rights to 2030 and beyond still up for grabs, the future remains uncertain and potentially Fox-less. “Fox Sports, World Cup broadcaster” was an eight-year sociological experiment conducted by Harvard University. The study is now complete; thank you for your time.Was this World Cup on Fox as bad as we thought it would be? It was not. But was it good? It was not. Or rather: it was good only in parts. For me, the abiding TV image of this summer of soccer will be the glasses of beer plonked before each guest on James Corden’s murderously unfunny late night show. Throughout the tournament these beers have remained three-quarters full, headless, and flat – and have become, in time, their own potent metaphor. Even at America’s own World Cup, Fox has steadfastly refused to give us the full pour.To be clear, 2026 is a distinct improvement on what came before. And yes, it’s always possible to watch on Telemundo or mute, but this is a review for the masochists who like their punishment delivered in English with the sound on. For those who didn’t witness it, it’s impossible to overstate how abominable the coverage of the 2022 World Cup truly was. Fox, learning the lessons of that disaster, wisely rebalanced its on-air talent pool for this tournament to include fewer hapless Americans and more elite foreigners. Lowe has been predictably terrific in the main anchor’s chair, holding an unruly panel of talent together with the stern mercy of a beloved schoolteacher. Jules Breach and Pien Meulensteen have brought much of the same vim to Fox’s coverage of the lower-profile games, while never quite dispelling the impression that they’re about to announce the next housemate to be kicked off the set of Big Brother. Speaking of which: with some of the world’s most historic skylines at its disposal, Fox bafflingly decided to park its expensively assembled team indoors, in a bland LA studio designed with curved graphic panels to resemble the airless rec room of some tech unicorn on the brink of insolvency. Between the makeshift stadium desks and this glitching green screen, the whole production has felt small and decarbonated. Manhattan? The Hollywood Hills? The skyway futurism of downtown Atlanta? Forget all that: here’s a corporate basement instead.The studio pundits have likewise offered a mix of fizzy and flat. John Obi Mikel has the gravitas to pull off a line like “The game needs a goal” and not sound like a complete dope, while Peter Schmeichel has huffed and interjected his way through the tournament like a perpetually disappointed dad, his contribution defined by the constant, pedantic insistence that Argentina won the last World Cup “three and a half years ago”. Thierry Henry has been uniformly superb, able to switch from tactical analysis to lip-quivering bombast with the assurance of a striker in total command of his own change of pace.Zlatan Ibrahimović mumbled through the first few weeks but grew into the tournament, eventually achieving a pleasant equilibrium between expertise, empathy, and disdain (for Ronald Koeman above all). Once he ditches the tedious “I am Zlatan” routine and allows himself to display his full emotional and conversational range, Ibrahimović is a fine pundit. Without Clarence Seedorf’s thoughtfulness and genial rumble of a laugh, Fox’s coverage of the World Cup would have been 10% inferior. Alexi Lalas? You might say I’m not a fan.As the mockery of Lalas online threatened to swallow the World Cup whole a few weeks ago, Fox Sports CEO Eric Shanks went on the defensive. “Lex has been the cornerstone of our soccer coverage for as long as I can remember,” Shanks said in an interview. “He’s the straw that stirs the drink.” Putting aside the vile image this conjures of viewers needing to suck Alexi Lalas to ingest the “drink” of the World Cup (I know hydration breaks have been a big talking point this tournament, but Gianni, if you’re reading, do NOT use this as a basis for further “reform” in 2030), let’s think about the metaphors here. Lalas is a cornerstone (solid) and a straw (solid) in contact with a drink (liquid). Why not go all the way, Eric, and make Lalas a gas? After all, vaporizing Alexi is what many of us have spent years calling for, and the man already generates a good amount of wind, so he’s halfway to gaseousness already.Fox’s allegiance to its resident tap dancer is emblematic of a broader rot that has held the network back this summer, even as it’s tried to meet the grandeur of a World Cup on home soil. Take the Iranian team’s arrival in the US under the cloud of an illegal war launched by the US itself: the Fox analysts hardly even mentioned it, waving the war and all its associated inhumanity away as mere “noise”. Fifa’s extraordinary capitulation to Donald Trump to suspend Folarin Balogun’s red card ban and allow the US striker to take the field against Belgium? Well, it was regrettable, but the card never should have been given, so: play on! Unbearably high ticket prices? Ads during the hydration breaks? The US government’s discriminatory system of visa bonds for visitors from certain World Cup-participating countries? Who is the host broadcaster to disagree with – or even raise – any of this? Fox has been a perfectly pliant and apolitical vessel for the most consumingly political World Cup of our lives.Even the choice of Winston as Fox’s man in the stands carried a powerful whiff. The NFL quarterback began the tournament jumping about half-naked and has ended it barking at the screen in frankly terrifying fashion. But the real problem here is one of casting rather than performance. Only Fox would think to make its “fun” fan correspondent for this World Cup a man whose Wikipedia page includes a hefty “Controversies” tab. Are you a professional athlete with an entry on the internet’s encyclopedia that includes the sub-headings “Sexual assault allegation”, “Shoplifting incidents”, and “2017 groping allegation”? Good news: you may have a bright career on Fox ahead of you.Amid all the chattering excellence of the Lowe-led New Fox, it’s been useful to have reminders of how self-parodyingly bad Old Fox can still be. The unpredictability of the draw meant that the US team did not play on the Fourth of July. To compensate, Fox handed the reins to its stalwart Americans – Rob Stone, Clint Dempsey, Donovan and Lalas – at a live set in sweltering Philadelphia, where they were assisted in their coverage of the day’s matches by a marching band left at a loose end after the city canceled its holiday parade on account of extreme heat. In place of another exhibition of Pochball, Fox gave us some decommissioned trombonists powering through a rendition of Anchors Aweigh while Lalas waved a huge American flag outside Independence Hall to what appeared to be a crowd of 30 people on the verge of expiry under the Anthropocene sun. Somewhere, I’m sure, John Hancock, Benjamin Franklin and the boys were all proudly looking on, safe in the knowledge that Fox Sports has carried on the legacy of elite cable TV programming for which they fought the British 250 years ago.Stone, demoted into a secondary anchor role amid his employer’s Anglo ascendancy, has been perhaps the biggest loser of this World Cup, but he’s nobly attempted to maintain a brave face. “Stoney” is the type of steady pro who can deliver the words “Your Fox starting lineups, brought to you by American Express” without drama, or gather every one of his 29 years of major broadcast experience into a line like “Deep-fried Mars bar – that’s a real thing in a lot of country fairs here in the United States as well”, which he dropped at the end of Chef Nick’s food battle between the Scottish Mars bar and Brazilian picanha. (The meat won in a knockout, for anyone wondering.) Ahead of the last-32 match between Brazil and Japan, Fox’s No 2 man introduced a feature on joga bonito with the words, “We paid a visit to Brazil to learn more about the roots of Joe Go Bonito”, making it sound like someone called Joseph had just gone absolutely mental on the dried tuna flakes at his local okonomiyaki spot. Did the moment get beyond him, or was Stone just hungry? Ultimately it’s this type of material that has kept us glued to the screen this summer, even as Fox’s coverage has threatened to become boringly professional.The World Cup, as I’ve written elsewhere, is always a drama of language, and wrangling foreign names into English can be hard, but this year’s installment has been uncommonly rich in mispronunciation and misunderstanding. Amid the usual roll call of manglings – I’ve counted about 12 different versions of “Quiñones”, “Türkiye” has veered from “Turk-eye-ah” to “Turkey: yay!”, and Lionel Messi’s first name has consistently been rendered like Lionel Richie’s – Fox has never stopped innovating, transforming football’s traditional halves into quarters and difficult last names into completely new characters. Raúl Jiménez has emerged as “Jim Ennez”, Marc Cucurella has become “Cuckoo Rela”, like he’s the crazy relative no one in the family talks about, and Japan left-back Takehiro Tomiyasu is now “Tommy Yiasou”, the wisecracking veteran waiter at a Greek restaurant that’s been feeding families since 1978.“We’ve spent a lot of time practicing the names of all the players in this World Cup, but there’s not much to worry about when you have a player called Ben Old coming on for Joe Bell”, observed Jacqui Oatley in the group match between Belgium and New Zealand, exhibiting the kind of dry wit that has made her one of the standout performers of the summer. I used to find her on-air partner Warren Barton’s insistence on crossing as the highest footballing art boorish, but as I’ve listened to him more over the years and tactical fashion has swung the way of set pieces, I’ve come to appreciate the back-to-the-land simplicity of his on-field philosophy (“Get it wide, get it in”). Stu Holden will forever look and sound like he’s just shown up for the first day of his summer job at a small town gas station, and there were many moments in the early stages of this tournament when Fox’s chief color guy was hyping up every routine trap and forward jog from Christian Pulisic as if “Captain America” was the second coming of Garrincha, and not a legspreading menswear model gearing up for a big summer of rest. But once the US games ended Holden was able to show the degree to which he’s matured as an analyst; his ability to convey in-game tactical fluctuations and capture the World Cup’s defining dramas have made this comfortably his best professional outing yet in the commentary box.Other announcers have fared rather worse. Darren Fletcher won points for noting during England’s first knockout match that “if it’s coming home, it’s taking a while to get there”, but lost them all for his execrable “siuuu” to mark Cristiano Ronaldo’s first goal against Uzbekistan, which sounded like someone dying mid-orgasm. In a World Cup that has seen much important and difficult work done to fit America’s artificial turf NFL stadiums with soccer-friendly grass, the reforestation of Donovan’s head still stands out as this tournament’s most impressive single feat of terraforming. But the proceeding hairline’s contributions this tournament have also proved an important modern truth: you can replant a bald head, but if you have a voice like a leaf blower, you’re stuck with it for life.John Strong, the play-by-play anchor of Fox’s top announcer team, has used this World Cup to launch a new style of ejaculatory emphasis in his commentary, by which he goes low then SUDDENLY GOES HIGH to make up for his chronic inability to match the excitement and personality of proceedings on the pitch. Whether describing plays (“Djed SPENCE, cuts it BACK, knocked DOWN, Declan RICE”) or throwing to a break (“Forty-five minutes down, FORTY-FIVE TO GO here in Seattle”), Strong has never met a sentence that could not be improved by division into this basic low-high dichotomy. To which the only reasonable response is: Shut UP, John STRONG, we’ve had ENOUGH, of this STYLE, of COMMENTARY, which is ANNOYING, and SUCKS, and never ENDS, even WHEN, there’s nothing HAPPENING, on the FIELD.Lowe, Breach, Oatley, Barton: Fox’s strongest performers have been mostly English, while the weak links are all homegrown. The level of mainstream media punditry about soccer in the US may be painfully low (“Could this be the year that France finally gets it done and they win the World Cup?” ESPN’s Stephen A Smith recently mused of the two-time champions), but is Fox’s collection of zesty Englishwomen, nonchalant Euros and all-American idiots the best we can hope for? There’s no question that British commentators, anchors and voices bring a certain romance, a plummy authority, to coverage of the sport. But I’ve long argued that American soccer needs more Americans on air, especially since the sport as it’s actually lived and discussed throughout the US bears little resemblance to the witless, bloviating face it’s given on screen. This country’s fans deserve better than Fox: why can’t American networks, pundits and analysts be the ones to deliver it?The incumbent will face stiff competition for the rights to the 2030 World Cup, and all these questions – plus the more elemental consideration of cost – will no doubt weigh heavily on the bidding. Fox has run constant plugs this past month for an enticing menu of shows, including Kitchen Nightmares, Nation’s Dumbest and The Quiz with Balls. But for those uninterested in sticking around to witness Ice-T’s struggle to spell the word “guarantee” or Gordon Ramsay’s likening of a set of poorly executed meatballs to “turds”, the road stops now. After eight years of Fox stinking up our screens every big tournament summer, we reach the end: the end of “players to watch, sponsored by Adidas”, of “keys to the match, sponsored by Jeep”, of “your moment of the half, sponsored by Visa”, of “your moment of the match, sponsored by Kinder Bueno”. Which brings us, at last, to your World Cup conclusion, sponsored by Aaron Timms: thank you for everything, Fox – and please don’t come back!

Aaron TimmsFri, 17 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
Romero’s World Cup heroics for Argentina make him one of Messi’s most trusted

Football News

Romero’s World Cup heroics for Argentina make him one of Messi’s most trusted

The mercurial performance at the back was a far cry from the gaffe-prone Spurs captain we’ve become accustomed to seeingAs Cristian Romero readied to receive a pass 10 yards from his goalline, Jude Bellingham and Anthony Gordon sensed a mistake in the making. The center-back’s posture was not ideal after he took a scoot backwards to collect, facing the left sideline as his opponents lustily converged. He would only have half a second to settle a bouncing ball, shift his momentum, and find a passing lane in the rapidly closing seam between the England duo.Easier said than done on most days, but this particular Wednesday was not most days. First touch: ball settled. Second touch: right foot shunting the ball to his left. Third touch: left foot, ball coolly slotted to an awaiting Nahuel Molina.Less than a minute later, Romero received a yellow card for a tactical bear hug on Bellingham. Small potatoes; the real, imminent disaster had already been averted.Such is the duality of the man they tried to dispossess. This wasn’t Cristian Romero, the gaffe-prone captain of a historically poor Tottenham. This was Cristian Romero, the mercurial but mostly dependable anchor of Argentina’s defense.At Tottenham, he led a squad of infamously bad passers through a second consecutive relegation scrap. He is among one of the Premier League’s Most Wanted given his defensive candor, handed yellow cards like they were fliers for an angsty nightclub.As the season plodded on, his tendency to leave a little extra in his challenges was more of a selection headache for whoever was managing Spurs that weekend than a motivator of his moribund teammates.As Spurs repeatedly folded once an opponent opened the scoring, Romero grew disillusioned. In April, a season-ending injury left him in tears – not just the culmination of an unusually frustrating campaign, but a viable threat to his World Cup duties. So he sought joy from a familiar fount.He drew ire for his initial plan to skip Tottenham’s final match, readying to visit boyhood Belgrano for a match against River Plate. Sensing the blowback, Romero returned to London and watched on as Tottenham retained their place in the Premier League before joining the post-match sighs of relief. The task complete, Romero returned to Argentina, the far more joyous alternative to his day job, and finished his recovery in time for the World Cup.As is true for most of La Albiceleste, pulling on the white-and-blue turns Romero into one of 11 bleeding hearts who leave no yard uncovered and no stud unshown for the good of the cause. Partnered with Lisandro Martínez, he is the relative hardman, often the final obstacle between an attacker and Emiliano Martínez. Save for Lionel Messi and the Aston Villa goalkeeper, Romero has arguably been Argentina’s most consistent player en route to their third World Cup final in four tournaments.Compared to his responsibilities at Tottenham last season, Romero is slightly more entrusted with linking Argentina’s defense to their midfield in possession. The more stable structure around him hinders his proclivity to leave his post and get baited into silly fouls, as Spurs’ opponents managed to repeatedly ensnare him in that same trap last season. He also enjoys being one of Messi’s most trusted targets to win attacking headers. Argentina’s great escape against Egypt began when Romero assumed his secondary role for club and country: a makeshift target man who scampers parallel to his striker when in possession and chasing a goal. Egypt were not equipped to account for this in the 79th minute, as he snuck into space between Ramy Rabia and Yasser Ibrahim to thunk home a looping cross from Messi and spark the ensuing comeback.Whatever is necessary for the task at hand, Romero will commit to the bit. On Sunday, that will mean accounting for Mikel Oyarzabal’s nimble movement and not letting Spain’s stable of deft dribblers bait him into unnecessary fouls. Argentina will need to test Spain’s resolve, as few teams have truly tried to outmuscle the finalists since Cape Verde’s stunning draw in the group stages. That may sound like a job too great for Cristian Romero of Tottenham, but that’s not who you are watching in this World Cup. Cristian Romero of Argentina knows better – if only just.Time will tell whether he gets a rosy welcome upon rejoining Spurs, though he is unlikely to be bothered by the potential of jeers. Supporters may be more inclined to laud Djed Spence for his industrious efforts against Argentina than Romero, caught yelling at a bemused Bellingham after the final whistle in Atlanta.By then he was fully immersed in his alternate persona, a crucial member of a team that will fiercely defend Messi’s honor – with Bellingham having stoked additional fire within Messi shortly after kickoff – until the day he retires. His day job, captaining a fabled if flawed club in London, can wait for one more week.

Jeff RueterThu, 16 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
Players ‘puzzled’ by tactics but Tuchel left himself no other option with his squad picks

Football News

Players ‘puzzled’ by tactics but Tuchel left himself no other option with his squad picks

The England head coach took a risk by selecting injury-prone players and ignoring creative options such as Foden, Palmer and Gibbs-WhiteWhen Thomas Tuchel became England’s head coach he spoke repeatedly about wanting his side to adopt a Premier League style. He wanted intensity, pace, full-throttle football. Tuchel offered clarity, his analysis was precise and his squad for the World Cup was built around the idea of overwhelming opponents with physicality and relentless running.There were roles for specialists and places for individuals who could be trusted to bring the vibes. There were like-for-like alternatives in various positions and Tuchel was granted a lot of leeway. He was bold with his choices and could respond to questions about omitting the creativity of Phil Foden, Cole Palmer, Adam Wharton, Morgan Gibbs-White and Trent Alexander-Arnold by arguing that he had a vision and was going to stick to it.There were glimpses of England’s high-speed approach when they beat Croatia in their opening game but the illusion was shattered during the surrender from 1-0 up in the semi-final against Argentina. The self-sabotage was astonishing, as Tuchel lost his nerve and handed the game to Lionel Messi. Argentina were there for the taking but Tuchel retreated.Some England players were said to have been puzzled by Tuchel overseeing a tactical capitulation, unable to understand why he decided to play so defensively. There was widespread surprise that he did not use the pace of Noni Madueke, Bukayo Saka, or Marcus Rashford to hit Argentina on the break.Tuchel came in for criticism from a host of former players. The former Germany forward Thomas Müller was scathing about how Argentina were invited to attack England. The former England striker Wayne Rooney, a pundit for the BBC, said Tuchel’s tactics were asking for trouble.How you lose matters. England went out to Argentina in the second round in 1998 but it was an epic performance with 10 men. Atlanta was nothing like that and the Football Association remains in thrall to Tuchel and is desperate not to make a change but it needs to recognise what happened. After all, Mark Bullingham, the FA’s chief executive, said that England’s best performance under Sir Gareth Southgate was their run to the quarter-finals at the 2022 World Cup, even though it was their earliest tournament exit under Tuchel’s predecessor.The postmortem goes deeper than the end result. How was the mood in the camp? Positive enough. England were together, as they proved against Mexico in the Azteca, but how did they play? There was never any flow or identity – and when it comes to analysing why it is worth going back to how Tuchel configured his squad and then used it.On one level it is pointless moaning about Palmer and Foden, partly because their domestic struggles hurt their selection chances, but also because there is nothing to suggest Tuchel would have put them on when England were leading against Argentina. Tuchel had fast attackers on the bench and chose not to use them. He veered away from his plan and he showed no faith in Saka’s fitness. The situation seemed made for the winger to come on and run at the 32-year-old Nicolás Tagliafico on the right. Tuchel resisted. Saka has been struggling with an achilles injury and, although he has shown flashes of class in previous games, Tuchel did not trust him when it came to the crunch.Ultimately, the manager fell into the familiar trap of relying on unfit or injury-prone players. England needed Saka but he remained on the bench. Tuchel restricted his options. The aim was to have wingers going down the outside and creating overloads. Tuchel did not want Palmer and Foden cutting in and clogging up the middle. Yet Madueke, Saka’s direct replacement, was such a disappointment. He fell out of favour after the quarter-final against Norway and it is fair to wonder whether Tuchel missed a trick by not selecting Jarrod Bowen or even Rio Ngumoha given Saka’s fitness issues and Madueke’s faltering confidence. It is damning that Tuchel ended up discarding some of his wide options having placed so much store in them. Rashford, like Madueke, was cast aside after fitful early displays.Gibbs-White, a direct runner who did not make the squad, may feel he could have made an impact given that he can also play wide and scored 18 goals last season. If only this was just about Saka, though. The problem is that several England players were injury concerns. The Newcastle defender Tino Livramento flew home injured. John Stones was rusty in central defence and needed time to get going. Reece James, another who played in the cursed right-back position, predictably had hamstring trouble and went down with cramp shortly before Argentina’s equaliser.These were foreseeable problems. Equally, it is fair to say that there were not many other defensive options. Luke Shaw and Lewis Hall are good left-backs but have fragile injury records. Harry Maguire’s bitter reaction to not being selected tells you why Tuchel overlooked him.Still, Tuchel ended up with a squad containing six centre-backs but only one left-footed left-back (Nico O’Reilly) and four central midfielders. He tied his own hands, not least when it came to reacting to Declan Rice’s neural pain in a hamstring and his lower back.Rice is crucial to how England play. Their structure disappears without him in midfield. Yet Tuchel knew his vice-captain was struggling to complete games. There had to be a viable alternative but the cover for Rice and Elliot Anderson was Jordan Henderson and Kobbie Mainoo.Those were mind-bending choices. Henderson is 36 and had made one brief substitute appearance in five games before fracturing a wrist during the celebrations against Mexico. Was he really there in a playing role? The evidence suggests otherwise. In fact Tuchel’s favoured change when Rice was struggling was to put James in midfield. Mainoo, who treats the ball like a friend, has not played. Wharton, another snappy passer, watched from home. Alex Scott, the energetic Bournemouth midfielder, and Myles Lewis-Skelly, who started in midfield for Arsenal in the Champions League final, were also overlooked.Tuchel never seemed to understand why he took Mainoo. He can complain about England lacking control when they led against Argentina but he left out players who are comfortable on the ball. It was a conscious choice from Tuchel and what makes it worse is that he did not even stick to his plan.Why did he not make better use of his squad? Tuchel spoke about having 14 or 15 starters. Others were there for specific situations. Ivan Toney was there as battering ram for emergency situations. Not giving the striker a sniff until England were on the verge of going out at least felt logical. However, not using Ollie Watkins was a weird choice. Harry Kane had a poor game against Argentina and should have been substituted. Watkins could have worked the channels and stretched them. The striker was given one brief substitute appearance against Panama, though, and is entitled to feel that Tuchel was too wedded to Kane.Plenty of England managers have blundered by indulging the star players. Tuchel was meant to be different. Now he looks like many who came before him. The scrutiny will be intense. Some players will wonder about the manager’s negativity. Others will wonder why they were not given a chance. The fans are ready to turn. There was trust in Tuchel. The FA will cling to it but the damage to his aura is vast. He made mistakes and the manner of the defeat makes it hard to look past them.

Jacob Steinberg in AtlantaThu, 16 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
Four passes in 19 minutes: damning numbers behind England’s collapse

Football News

Four passes in 19 minutes: damning numbers behind England’s collapse

No successful tackles after the 63rd minute and failure to break up play through fouls also played their part in World Cup semi-final defeatThere will be coaching courses of the future that use footage of England’s performance against Argentina to illustrate how not to defend a one-goal lead. If that sounds harsh, the data from the match justifies that stance.Many ugly statistics emerged once the postmortem began. The most damning came from OptaJoe, who noted England had 12% possession in the 30 minutes between Anthony Gordon’s goal and Argentina’s equaliser. “That is the lowest by a team to be winning for at least 10 minutes in a World Cup match in the last 60 years,” they added.It gets worse if we break this period down. Compared with what was to come, Thomas Tuchel’s side did relatively well before the hydration break. A fine Harry Kane pass helped set up a shot in the 66th minute, before the captain immediately had an effort when England regained possession in the final third. Although Emiliano Martínez’s goal was not seriously threatened, the sequence suggested Argentina could be occupied in their own half.That threat disappeared once Ezri Konsa replaced Gordon as England adopted a 5-4-1 formation. The change left them with no real pace on the break. As huge a call as it would have been to substitute Kane, he provided little benefit once the team tried to see out the match with a low block.Here’s something for Tuchel to consider as he awaits the third-place playoff rather than the final this weekend. England’s goal difference across the tournament was +6 from 6.3 matches, or +0.82 per 90 minutes played. It’s interesting how it fluctuated with different players on the pitch, as wary as we must be of reading too much into small samples for individuals in team sports. The goal difference was +2.01 per 90 when Bukayo Saka was playing, +1.16 for Reece James and +1.14 for Gordon.Pace has helped them and it might have here, yet the Arsenal winger remained on the bench. Having a fast player to target up front would have offered an escape route from pressure.About 19 minutes separated Konsa coming on and the winning goal. England attempted 11 passes in that period.Eleven. This isn’t Spinal Tap, it’s a World Cup semi-final. Only four of their passes in this spell were completed: two from the post-hydration break restart as Jordan Pickford gave the ball to John Stones before immediately receiving it back, then another in stoppage time when Kane found Jude Bellingham only for him to surrender possession. The other successful pass? Bellingham’s kick-off after Enzo Fernández’s equaliser.That sequence summed up how England’s hopes dissolved. Bellingham passed back to Pickford, who sent the ball long towards Kane to no avail. The goalkeeper was responsible for five of England’s seven unsuccessful passes between Konsa’s introduction and them going 2-1 down, with three of his efforts going out of play.A lack of game management was another problem. Argentina frequently broke up play through fouls (not all of which were awarded) until they went behind. England conceded one free-kick between Gordon’s goal and the 97th minute and made their final successful tackle of the contest in the 63rd.To cap it all, England conceded the winner to a header from 174cm tall Lautaro Martínez after bringing on 201cm Dan Burn to combat Argentina’s aerial threat. Burn’s only touches occurred in the final third after England went behind. In their own penalty area he was no use, more an incredibly large ornament.No matter which numbers you use to analyse the period after England went ahead, the sums don’t add up.

Andrew BeasleyThu, 16 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
White House says Donald Trump will attend World Cup final

Football News

White House says Donald Trump will attend World Cup final

Infantino has said US president will hand over trophySpain v Argentina final is set for Sunday in New JerseyDonald Trump will attend Sunday’s World Cup final between Spain and Argentina, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said Thursday.“We look forward ⁠to the final match on Sunday, ​and I know ‌the president ‌looks forward to attending,” Leavitt said. “This is a fitting conclusion to a tournament that showcased America’s ability to host the world on the grandest stage.”“Yes, hopefully we’ll present the trophy together in the final,” Infantino said. “That’s always been the plan, and that’s how it’s always been done in the past – the president of the country where the final is held presents the trophy together with the Fifa president.”At the 2022 World Cup final, the emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad al-Thani, joined Infantino to award the trophy to Lionel Messi and his Argentina teammates. Vladimir Putin awarded it to Kylian Mbappé and France after their win at the 2018 World Cup in Russia.Trump was front and center for the final of last summer’s Club World Cup at the same stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, presenting the trophy to champions Chelsea and drawing loud boos from the crowd.While Trump has not yet attended a game at this World Cup, he has nevertheless played a significant role. He has a close relationship with Infantino, and called the Fifa president to lobby for a review of USA star Folarin Balogun’s controversial red-card suspension before their last-16 match. Fifa did reverse Balogun’s ban, but the political circus cast a pall over the US team, who exited a promising World Cup with a flat loss to Belgium.Trump has made several appearances at sporting events since his reelection. Last year, he attended the Super Bowl, tennis’s US Open, the Daytona 500 and golf’s Ryder Cup. This year, he has attended several golf events, college football’s national championship game and Game 3 of the NBA Finals, where he was met with boos from the New York Knicks home crowd.Leavitt told reporters that she did not know which team Trump was supporting in the final.“I’m sure he’ll have a fun answer ⁠for you,” she told reporters.Leavitt also said Trump will attend a Fifa reception at Trump Tower in New York City on Friday. Soccer’s governing body opened an office in the building last year.

Ella BrockwayThu, 16 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
The Guardian view on England’s World Cup disappointment: a tale of the not wholly unexpected | Editorial

Football News

The Guardian view on England’s World Cup disappointment: a tale of the not wholly unexpected | Editorial

There was a sense of deja vu as Argentina came from behind to win an intense semi-final. But the players also gave the nation some memorable highsHistorically, English football-supporting culture has had a well-known darker side. But in recent decades, as the England men’s team’s trophy drought has continued, some of its unofficial anthems have acquired an endearingly melancholy quality. “It was nearly complete, it was nearly so sweet”, as the Three Lions song had it in the 1990s, when England exited a World Cup and a European Championship at the semi-final stage.This summer, Oasis’s Wonderwall has been the soundtrack as Harry Kane and co progressed to Wednesday’s climactic semi-final showdown with Argentina. This is a song which, very wisely in an England context, puts a heavy emphasis on the idea of “maybe”. In the end it turned out to be maybe not.A watching audience of more than 24 million began to believe as England scored first to put themselves on the brink of a first World Cup final since 1966. But a familiar sense of resignation then took over, as the team wilted under Argentinian pressure and lost to a stoppage-time winner. The Portuguese sometimes define their national sensibility using the word saudade, conveying a mixture of nostalgia and longing. England’s footballers and followers could do with their own equivalent.The inquest, thankfully, is so far proving less vicious than the one which led to the disgraceful vilification of David Beckham, after his red card was followed by defeat against Argentina in 1998. But England’s German coach, Thomas Tuchel, is coming under fire after presiding over his side’s retreat into a defensive shell in the latter stages of the game. Nervous England teams lost in similar fashion to Croatia in the 2018 semi-final, and to Italy in the Euro 2020 final. Tuchel was supposed to be the foreign change agent, but the inability to take control from a winning position was all too familiar. Football, as we know, is a fickle game. It was only last week that he was being talked up on Mumsnet.As the air slightly goes out of a heatwave-heavy summer, the rest of the world’s attention will shift to a Spain-Argentina final – surely to be the 39-year-old Lionel Messi’s last appearance on football’s greatest stage. The 2026 men’s World Cup has suffered from hyper-commercialisation, visa injustices and an assault on the tournament’s sporting integrity by Donald Trump, facilitated by the egregious Fifa president, Gianni Infantino. But the extraordinary longevity of Messi’s genius, which turned the game against England, has offered a spectacle to delight anyone interested in sport. The provocative and reprehensible brandishing of a Falklands-related banner by his teammates has done him a disservice by generating a row where there should been only acclamation.Tuchel and his deflated players will depart the US after a third-place match against a similarly disappointed France team. Some will leave having enhanced their reputation, others will have regrets. But collectively they confirmed England’s status in the top rank of footballing nations – a position not to be taken for granted after periods of spectacular underachievement – and gave the nation some memorable highs.The intense, passionate victory over Mexico in a cacophonous, stormy Azteca stadium will take its place among the greatest of England triumphs. For the rest, Wonderwall captures the immediate mood nicely: “Today was gonna be the day, but they’ll never throw it back to you.” There’s always tomorrow, though.

EditorialThu, 16 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
Move over Soccerey Bally: how Striker the dog became a 1994 World Cup hero

Football News

Move over Soccerey Bally: how Striker the dog became a 1994 World Cup hero

The tournament’s mascot came to herald the ubiquitous, commercial aims of a growing international spectacleDeep within a dark warehouse in Hillsborough, North Carolina, there sits a severed head. Encased in plastic, perfectly preserved and seemingly begging to be reanimated, it belongs to an American soccer legend.For a seismic summer 32 years ago, Striker the dog was more ubiquitous than any of World Cup 94’s players, plastered all over billboards, Coke cans, key chains, caps and hundreds of other items. Kids carried around Striker dolls. Grown men played Striker-themed pinball machines and Super Nintendo games and posed for photos with the pup in stadiums.As Striker’s remains – the foam and felt head, torso and limbs – lie in darkness at the US Soccer Hall of Fame archives, this summer’s World Cup has had its own trio of mascots. Canada’s Maple the Moose, America’s Clutch the Bald Eagle and Mexico’s Zayu the Jaguar seem caught in some bizarre liminal space between realism and cartoon fantasy, residents of a mascot version of the uncanny valley.That trio feel like AI slop, though. Striker? US Soccer chose a much simpler path with him, whipping together a cartoon dog. Years later, that choice has made him the one of the most memorable mascots in World Cup history.John Over and Joey Banaszkiewicz are responsible for some of the most well-known pieces of American animation of the late 20th century. They were young artists at Warner Brothers in the mid-90s, right around the time Steven Spielberg was leading that studio through an animation renaissance.The two had a hand in crafting the storylines and artwork for Animaniacs and Tiny Toon Adventures, drawing characters that would become familiar to an entire generation of American children. Their work wasn’t always for kids – the first episode of Animaniacs that Over ever worked on was quickly pulled after Buster Bunny and Plucky Duck got drunk and stole a police car.The culture at Warner Brothers back then, Over and Banaszkiewicz will tell you, was something akin to the island of misfit toys.“I feel like some people got there right out of prison,” says Banaszkiewicz, who landed at the studio after graduating from Cal Arts. Over arrived after working for John Kricfalusi, the creator of another iconic piece of 90s animation: the Ren and Stimpy Show.“The currency there was ‘how hard could we make each other laugh,’” Over says. “We were just a bunch of 20-year-olds that were let loose. People were just doing foul drawings of each other and seeing how far you could milk a joke or an embarrassing situation. But it was fantastic, because that’s really how you get your creativity built up.”In the summer of 1992, in between seasons of Tiny Toons and Animaniacs, animators found themselves with nothing to work on. For a few weeks, they’d pass the time by taking hours-long lunch breaks or “playing several rounds of miniature golf across the street”, Over remembers, but eventually, higher-ups within Warner Brothers suggested laying employees off or furloughing them.Spielberg wanted nothing to do with that idea. At his insistence, staff were kept on, and Spielberg told executives to find them other work.Right around that time, the organizing committee for the 1994 World Cup was searching for a mascot. Alan Rothenberg, the US Soccer Federation president, picked up the phone and set a meeting with Jean MacCurdy, the president of Warner Brothers Animation.Thirty years earlier, Reginald Hoye and Richard Culley, employees at a London-area marketing agency, were handed their own brief. The 1966 World Cup was rapidly approaching and the two were tasked with doing something entirely new: creating a mascot.It’s hard to imagine, but World Cups to that point were largely bereft of the consumerism that so thoroughly permeates them today. There were barely any advertisements at all, really, or merchandise. And certainly no mascots.In 10 minutes, Culley and Hoye whipped up World Cup Willie, the first-ever World Cup mascot. There are layers to Willie. He sports the union jack and his shaggy, charming appearance was in line with England’s broader moment, as the country’s perception moved away from its staid past and migrated towards that of a cultural tastemaker. This was the era of the Beatles, the Stones and James Bond.Willie fit right in; he was an instant smash, and others followed. In 1970, Juanito – a small Mexican child decked out in a sombrero – was the first human mascot, a trend that continued into the 1974 and 1978 World Cups.Then came the produce. Spain rolled out Naranjito, an anthropomorphic orange, in 1982 and Mexico came back with Pique, a mustachioed jalapeno pepper, in 1986.Then things got weird. In 1990, organizers in Italy hosted a design competition and received 50,000 entries, portraying everything from dogs to eggplants to an anthropomorphic piece of ziti. A panel of judges, including such luminaries as famed Ferrari designer Sergio Pininfarina, settled on an entry from Lucio Boscardin, an unheralded painter and sculptor.Boscardin came up with his idea at a traffic light. He took the word “Italia”, broke apart the lettering and assembled it into a stick figure of sorts, employing a soccer ball as the figure’s head. The end result was Ciao, a modern art fever dream.Tournament organizers quickly realized that Boscardin’s cubist vision was impossible to represent in costume, so they just threw together a dozen or so sculptures of Ciao, toting him around from stadium to stadium.The designers of Striker weren’t going to make that same mistake, though their early concepts were just as terrifying.“There were a bunch of people trying to do a soccer ball thing,” Over says. “People didn’t know what to call it really. I think Joey’s version was called Soccerey Bally or something like that. It was like a humanoid soccer ball with arms and legs. Joey’s storyboards are always funny and outrageous, so he had like soccer players taking the thing out to romantic candlelit dinners, and there’s just balls sitting everywhere. The player is in bed with a ball, he’s having sex with a ball, he’s everywhere with a ball.”US Soccer was not in any rush to peddle soccer-based cartoon pornography, and thankfully animators at Warner Brothers began to explore about a dozen other possibilities, “both animal and humanoid”, said MacCurdy. There were space creatures. Cats. Cougars. Bears.“In the end we just ended up looking at a lot of the old World Cup mascots,” Over says. “A lot of them were just awful. One was just a giant orange? And a lot of them had historical significance or whatever. Soccer was sort of not super popular here, so we thought let’s do this ‘underdog’ kind of idea. That’s when we started doing versions of, you know, ‘soccer dog’.”With that, the two embarked on a design process that left them bruised and battered. Hearing Over prattle on about what happened will feel familiar to any artist or creative who has ever applied their craft to a commercial endeavor.“We ran into problems with these dorks at [US Soccer],” says Over, laughing. “They’d look at your drawings. As an animator you’re always exaggerating things. Somebody kicks a ball and you have the leg go way up. They would say – well, ‘a child could never kick a ball that hard.’ Like, it’s a freaking soccer dog, dude. It is a cartoon dog!”“It ended up being sort of a design by committee thing,” Banaszkiewicz says. “And in the world of animation, that’s always death. Pretty soon it’s ‘I don’t like these fingers’ or ‘I think his ears are too sharp’ or ‘can you give him a bigger smile?’ Pretty soon you don’t even recognize him any more.”The pup we now know as Striker was at that point still being called Soccer Dog over at Warner Brothers and the slightly more clever World Cup Pup in the halls at US Soccer, not exactly the kind of names that move merchandise. So the World Cup organizing committee, headed up by Rothenberg, decided to let the public name the mascot. They bought advertising space in hundreds of local and national newspapers, encouraging fans to call their vote via a 1-900 number ($0.95 per call, in case you were wondering) or mail-in ballot. To keep things simple, the organizing committee narrowed the list down to four names: Striker, Sweeper, Champ and Sidekick.About 25,000 people cast their vote over the six-week campaign, with Striker the clear favorite. At a cost of $2,500 each, the organizing committee ordered a dozen Striker costumes, thrown together by Scollon Productions, a mom-and-pop costume shop based in White Rock, South Carolina. They made a few refinements to his look, swapping out a rugby-inspired jersey for a soccer kit and positioning the ball at the dog’s feet instead of forcing him to carry it around in his hands.The pup needed a backstory, so the organizing committee put their best wordsmiths on the assignment, and they did not disappoint. Striker was birthed by Mr and Mrs Mutt, they wrote, graduating with honors from obedience school. His favorite song? Hound Dog, by Elvis Presley. As for whether Striker has a significant other – he’s officially listed as single. “Playing the field,” as they say.“He best represents sports and this country,” Rothenberg said at the time. “And, being crass and commercial, we want to sell as much merchandise as possible.” Tournament organizers estimated that they’d make more than a billion – yes, a billion – dollars off of merchandise bearing Striker’s likeness.One curious detail about Striker’s origin story is that promoters suggested the dog was neither male nor female. That idea didn’t seem to stick, though: the pup got male pronouns nearly every time he was mentioned.Striker’s boots are a size-24 wide, if you’re wondering. Huge shoes to fill. But somebody had to. That task fell to Carlos Parada.Back in 1986, Parada was a wide-eyed teenager with a dream to go to the World Cup in Mexico. So he did what any irresponsible college student would: he got a high-interest credit card and bought the next flight out, hoping to crash with a few friends he had south of the border.Parada ended up scoring free tickets to nearly every match at the Azteca. He watched Diego Maradona score with his “Hand of God” and then watched him score arguably the greatest goal in the history of the tournament moments later. He was there for the final, among the best ever played. He returned home to Los Angeles, determined to involve himself in soccer.“When the [organizing committee] moved from Chicago to Los Angeles before the World Cup,” Parada says, “I knew I had to get involved. You know. To get free tickets.”Parada signed up as a volunteer, then took a part-time post at the organizing committee’s headquarters, one that put him in the office at 6am, around the time Rothenberg arrived – “to get a jump on the east coast folks,” Parada remembers. The two became chummy, and when a full-time marketing position became available, Parada got the job.He was tasked with safekeeping two of the tournament’s icons. One was the World Cup trophy. The 27-year-old went continent hopping with it for months, always flying in first class. “One seat for me,” he remembers, “and one for the trophy, right next to me.”The other was Striker. Parada, assisted by Joann Klonowski, the tournament’s head of marketing, put together guidelines for those inhabiting the costumes –mostly volunteers, as Parada once was.“He never speaks,” Klonowski told a reporter at the time. “He is not allowed to remove any part of his costume in public; for instance, he can’t remove his head. That takes away the aura for the kids who see him. He – the character, actually – is neither male nor female. The character never acknowledges that there is a person inside. The character communicates through mime movements, or through a personal escort, who always accompanies the character.”Parada also contributed a training film which, like the guidelines, is a little surreal, with Parada cheering his volunteers along as they run through the motions in and out of costume.Striker was unveiled in front of Mann’s Chinese Theatre in Hollywood in October 1993, where he sank his paws into the wet pavement beneath him, as is the tradition with any big star. He was at pre-tournament friendlies, hobnobbing and posing with fans, even crossing the Atlantic for promotional events. He was at the World Cup draw, and everywhere else, plastered all over billboards, TV ads, airplanes and a boatload of other merch.One place he wasn’t: the opening ceremony. Folks at US Soccer had visions of throwing Striker alongside Oprah Winfrey, Bill Clinton, Diana Ross and the rest of the crew but Striker was banished, collateral damage after a war between Disney (the original organizers of the ceremony) and Opryland USA (the company that ended up putting it on). Striker, said one Opryland employee, “is not here because we think he’s stupid.”Many others did not find this soccer dog stupid. Mexico goalkeeper Jorge Campos, Parada remembers, developed a strange fascination with the mascot and was insistent on standing next to him before matches. The Argentina squad also took a liking to Striker. In one of the tournament’s more remarkable off-field scenes, they tracked Striker down after crushing Greece 4-0 in their group-stage opener, throwing him in the air in celebration. After their next game against Nigeria, Maradona was led off the field for a drug test, one that ended his international career.Kids and adults alike were equally obsessed, in part owing to the fact that the dog could actually play soccer.“I learned pretty quickly that if you got a kid who played soccer in the costume and put him in Sambas, you could have pretty good control of his feet,” Parada says. “People would go insane when they saw Striker juggling a ball, which he could do pretty easily.”After the World Cup ended, after the banners came down and the collectible pin sets, hats and sweatshirts were shoved into drawers or sent to thrift shops, Striker drifted back into the ether. Others followed in his footsteps: a rooster (Footix, France 98), a lion (Goleo VI, Germany 06), a leopard (Zakumi, South Africa 10), a wolf (Zabivaka, Russia 18), a trio of aliens (Ato, Kaz and Nik, South Korea/Japan 02). By the time Qatar rolled around in 2022, we got La’eeb, a floating garment, albeit an adorable one.As the tournament has become more and more bloated and more and more commercialized, Striker evolved into a symbol for a simpler time, when the teams were fewer and the tickets were cheaper.Rothenberg, though, more or less forgot about him – when reached for this piece, he conceded that he didn’t remember anything about the mascot’s development. Neither did MacCurdy – the animation head at Warner Brothers – or Klonowski, the marketing head who ran the project for the organizing committee.Over and Banaszkiewicz had no idea whatsoever that Striker had had any sort of impact on a particular generation of soccer fans in America, not until they were contacted at least. Banaszkiewicz put it bluntly: “I had no idea anybody cared, honestly.”Over remembered the short-term effects, yes – seeing his co-creation on the side of an American Airlines 747, at games and on light-pole banners – but that was more or less the end of it for him. When Over and Banaszkiewicz hopped on a call together and chatted for the first time in years, though, the memories came flooding back.Neither artist feels a terribly strong sense of attachment to Striker. There were talks of an animated series at some point, but in the end the dog was just a drawing to them, or an intern in a costume.“I remember Jean MacCurdy and I went down to watch them unveil Striker, when he put his feet in the cement at Mann’s Chinese Theater, right next to Humphrey Bogart’s [hand prints.] It all felt so … forced. This love for this character was sort of forced. So it doesn’t rank that high as far as the stuff I’ve done, because you’re not infusing it with any personality as a film-maker. There’s no story to it, it’s sort of a graphic placeholder.”For an entire generation of American kids, though, Striker was part of that magical summer, one where they fell in love with the sport of soccer and never turned back.

Pablo Iglesias MaurerThu, 16 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
Nearly one in five World Cup matches reached heat levels players’ union warns against

Football News

Nearly one in five World Cup matches reached heat levels players’ union warns against

Guardian analysis finds 19% of games reached heat levels warranting delays, as Fifa defends its player safeguardsThe climate crisis has come for football.During this year’s World Cup, nearly one in five of the tournament’s 100-plus matches took place in levels of heat and humidity that a football players’ union has previously said should trigger delays or postponements, a Guardian analysis has found. An additional 23 matches were played in cities as they reached those heat levels, but in stadiums where conditions were mitigated by air conditioning.“The climate crisis is hitting the things we all need, like a stable climate, clean air and affordable food, as well as the things we love, like football and other sports,” Simon Stiell, executive secretary for the United Nations climate body, said in an emailed comment.Our analysis looked at conditions where the tournament’s 104 matches were either already played (102) or the forecasts for the two remaining matches.The findings are a sign of a broader challenge facing football as the planet warms. The climate crisis is making extreme heat more frequent and intense, raising new questions about whether the conditions in which major tournaments are played can remain safe for players and supporters.“The 2026 Fifa World Cup matches have introduced a true stress test of heat mitigation and preparedness,” said Joshua L DeVincenzo, an assistant director at Columbia University’s National Center for Disaster Preparedness. “Fifa, spectators, stadium operators, and others … were tested firsthand on the disruptions and complications that extreme heat and weather can pose.”The findings come as a record-breaking heatwave scorches much of the United States, with more than 125 million Americans spanning from California to New England under dangerous heat alerts. Sunday’s final seems set to be played in conditions with a wet bulb globe temperature estimate of just under 26C (79F), with low humidity alleviating the effects of high air temperatures. However, another climate-fueled concern could plague attenders: Wildfire smoke is expected to continue to degrade air quality in the region, with New York City mayor, Zohran Mamdani, warning of health impacts.Our analysis found that an estimated 20 matches were played in conditions with wet bulb globe temperatures (WBGT) that may have been at or over 28C (82F).Under those conditions, the players’ union Fifpro has argued, games should be delayed or postponed to protect footballers’ health. Other match attenders can also face risks, said DeVincenzo.“We learned from this World Cup that, in addition to player safety and health, important precautions must be considered for spectators, volunteers and stadium staff long before the day of the match,” he said.Fifpro declined to comment on the latest analysis, but previously told the Guardian: “The lesson for everyone in the industry is that with a warming planet, heat conditions will play a bigger part in tournament and league scheduling decisions in the future.”WBGT readings account for humidity, direct sunlight and wind to provide a more accurate measure of heat stress and the body’s ability to cool itself through sweating. At high enough levels of heat and humidity, sweat can no longer evaporate efficiently, preventing the body from cooling itself and leading to rapid overheating that can cause heat illness or even death.Official WBGT measurements require specialized equipment on site, but the Guardian compiled approximations based on air temperature and humidity data for the time and place of each match, with data from the open-source weather service Open-Meteo. Estimates were calculated using a formula created by the Australian Bureau of Meteorology and used by institutions including the Canadian military.The hottest game played in a non-air-conditioned stadium was held on the Fourth of July in Philadelphia. During the France v Paraguay round of 16 match, temperatures at the city’s stadium reportedly reached 38C (100F), and WBGT during the game may have reached or exceeded 33.9C (93F), the Guardian’s analysis found.The hottest game overall was played when Argentina defeated Austria 2-0 on 22 June in Dallas, Texas. Though the game was played in one of the only three fully air-conditioned World Cup 2026 stadiums (the other two being in Houston, Texas and Atlanta, Georgia), the Dallas match still exposed those outside the venue to sweltering conditions. The asphalt outside the stadium, for instance, reportedly reached a sizzling and dangerous 50C (122F).“Spectator experiences created a secondary risk in the heat; factors such as long walking distances without cover, unshaded areas, sun-exposed seating in the stadium, and long wait times in heat-emitting spaces like parking lots put people at a much higher risk of heat stress and related injuries,” he said. “These experiences can be addressed ahead of future games by training volunteers to identify signs of heat stress and to know the appropriate actions to take when fans experience dizziness, fainting, or falls.”Every match played in three cities – Dallas, Houston and Miami – appears to have been contested in conditions that breached the 33.9C threshold. At the Miami, which does not have air conditioning, players, workers and spectators alike blistered under WGBT readings of approximately 32.5C (90.5F) during Norway’s match against England last weekend. Temperatures reached 33C (91.4F) with 65% humidity, and sweat poured off of every face in the venue.Record-breaking heat and humidity are set to blanket the midwestern and eastern US this week, potentially making conditions even more challenging for players and fans at some games. In the future, conditions could deteriorate even further.The 2030 World Cup, for instance, is set to be staged across Spain, Portugal and Morocco, each of which is already experiencing significantly more extreme heat due to the climate crisis. Four years later, Saudi Arabia is expected to host the 2034 tournament during the northern hemisphere winter, a scheduling shift designed to avoid summer temperatures that regularly climb above 40C (104F).

Dharna Noor and Seán ClarkeThu, 16 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story
View from the other side: inside Argentina’s celebrations after semi-final win against England

Football News

View from the other side: inside Argentina’s celebrations after semi-final win against England

Watching England lose is one thing. Watching them lose surrounded by millions celebrating Argentina’s march to another World Cup final, is completely differentLook, most people were awfully good about it. Our waiter at a restaurant near Plaza de Mayo shook our hands warmly and said nice things about Jude Bellingham. On the metro ride back from the fan zone there was no massive gloating either, just bright-eyed kids in Lionel Messi shirts swept along by the nationwide euphoria. “Vamos, Vamos Argentina!” they sang, barely able to believe their team were once again in a World Cup final.And to be a stray English bystander in a city totally awash in sky blue and white was … a rare privilege. Some of us currently over here covering England’s rugby union tour have been lucky enough to visit a few iconic sporting cauldrons, but to be in Buenos Aires in the aftermath of Argentina defeating England at a football World Cup is right up there.From train drivers triumphantly honking their horns at every underground platform to people dancing in the streets and old ladies waving flags from balconies high above the traffic, it made even a frenzied cricket World Cup fixture between India and Pakistan feel like a garden fete. “Tell them you’re Scottish,” advised my Argentinian friend, concerned for our welfare in the event of an English victory. In the event there was no need for any such subterfuge.For a while, though, that was not a certainty. Imagine, if you can, sitting in a deserted library in the tiniest hamlet in deepest Tierra del Fuego. It still would not be as quiet as the aghast silence that greeted Anthony Gordon putting England 1-0 up. Forty years on from Diego Maradona’s Hand of God, the Foot of Gordon threatened to be almost as legendary. Momentarily it felt like Buenos Aires had had all the ‘air’ sucked out of it.Alas, poor England, we all know how it finished. And, leaving aside the idiot fan zone announcer briefly yelling about the ‘Malvinas’ and someone setting fire to a homemade flag of St George as the celebrations ramped up in town, the main takeaway is just how football crazy this country is. Lorries and cars with national flags draped across dashboards, Messi’s face on every billboard … Mexico and Brazil may say otherwise but Argentina belongs in an obsessive league of its own.Goodness knows how frenzied the atmosphere will be during Sunday’s final. After Argentina won the World Cup four years ago, around four million people took to the streets of the capital. The city was so ridiculously congested that a planned open-top bus parade had to be abandoned; in the end the players flew overhead in helicopters instead. I asked one local resident how long the public celebrations had lasted. “They’re still going on,” came the dry reply.And beating the English always adds a certain extra frisson. En route into town from the airport this week, our parka-wearing taxi driver made teasing ‘Hand of God’ gestures at us as soon as he found out our nationality. It might have been more amusing had he not been hammering down a busy dual carriageway at 90mph at the time.Subsequently, having made absolutely sure to charge us a vastly inflated fare on the grounds that his meter “wasn’t working”, our man also made a point of winding down his window and shouting “Campeones, Argentina!” as he pulled away. For some people, getting one over Los Ingleses never loses its appeal.Happily, though, there are also those determined to reject crass parallels between a mere football match and the 1982 Falklands crisis. Argentinian war veterans even put out an eve-of-game statement calling on politicians not to use the semi-final as a platform to push for sovereignty over the South Atlantic islands, asking fans instead to honour the memory of the Argentinian soldiers killed in the conflict.That said, “El Que No Salta Es Un Inglés” – “Anyone who doesn’t jump is an Englishman” – remains very definitely the local chant of choice. Incidentally, the recent death of Bonnie Tyler also made headlines here because her hit single, It’s a Heartache, supplies the tune for another extremely popular terrace ditty, the lyrics of which are probably best left to the imagination.Either way, it now falls to Messi and co to finish the job. Argentina’s population is about 46 million – the wider Buenos Aires metropolitan area is home to about 16 million people alone – and the scenes at the capital’s Obelisk monument, where fans traditionally go to celebrate major wins, will be off the charts should Spain be beaten.

Robert Kitsonin Buenos AiresThu, 16 Jul 2026
Source: The Guardian
Read story