Latest Sports Stories

Football News

Funds for 2027 will match men’s World Cup in 2026 Players given better flights and individual hotel rooms Teams in the 2027’s Women’s World Cup in Brazil will receive the same preparation money from Fifa as those that played at the 2026 men’s tournament, the world’s governing body has announced. The preparation money for the 32 teams has been more than doubled to $2.5m (£1.86m) each. In 2023, the total preparation money for the tournament was $31m; it will now be $80m. Every player will be guaranteed business class or chartered flights, as well as their own hotel room rather than having to share. Fifa says this will bring the provisions for the women’s players in line with the men’s World Cup. That is likely be welcomed after the topic caused controversy at previous tournaments. A survey conducted by the players’ union Fifpro in 2023, after the most recent Women’s World Cup, co-hosted by Australia and New Zealand, found 80% of players’ return flight had been in business class. Ninety-four per cent flew in business class on their outbound flights. The total prize fund for the tournament is yet to be decided. Fifa has named the United States as the host of the inaugural Women’s Club World Cup in January 2028. The Guardian revealed this month the US was lined up to stage the event, with Los Angeles and San Diego among the favoured host cities. The competition will feature 19 teams, with seven already qualified: Arsenal, Club América Femenil, Barcelona, Gotham FC, Naegohyang from North Korea, Corinthians and Wuhan Jiangda. Six European teams will take part, with the AFC, CAF, Concacaf and Conmebol being represented by three clubs each, plus one team from Oceania. Fifa’s chief women’s football officer, Sarai Bareman, said: “We undertook a detailed assessment to identify the most suitable host for the inaugural edition of the Women’s Club World Cup. Ultimately, the United States’ recent excellence in staging top Fifa tournaments, combined with the significant interest in women’s football there plus its elite sporting infrastructure, made the country the standout option. “Alongside the vibrant and passionate women’s football ecosystem in the United States, the qualified clubs, government, host cities, our commercial and media partners and more, our mission will be to set an impressive standard for global women’s club football and a benchmark for the future.”

Football News

The first awarding marked the apex of Gianni Infantino’s hubris. A new version could highlight the good in the world of soccer Poor Fifa peace prize. Unloved, unliked, mocked, tainted by association with its first winner. And now demoted, too, after Fifa president Gianni Infantino dumped the thing on the global governing body’s “social responsibility committee” to look after. To redeem it, rather than to ditch it, to spare Infantino the embarrassment of acknowledging that his fake prize was really just a fake prize all along. Here is where we should probably acknowledge that, as fake prizes go, and in the context of what it was intended to accomplish, the first awarding of the Fifa peace prize was an unqualified success. It achieved exactly what it was meant to, made by Infantino to flatter Donald Trump, the man he needed to keep on his side to safeguard the riches to be extracted from the North American market in order to consolidate his power base within Fifa. Trump, the gullible buffoon, was pleased as punch – handed a big, golden bauble and a medal he placed around his own neck – and briefly forgot about the Nobel peace prize he desperately covets. The 22-person social responsibility committee is one of the dozens of standing committees Infantino has created to dole out generous per diems to his allies. It has been charged with recasting the prize into a recognition of social harmony and responsibility, as the Guardian has reported, and will probably seek to depoliticize it – or at least stop awarding it to politicians. There are no aspiring autocrats to placate for the foreseeable future, after all, since Saudi Arabia’s de-facto ruler and host of the 2034 World Cup, Mohammed bin Salman, doesn’t seem to go in for that kind of thing. That first incarnation of the prize will stand as a monument to Infantino’s folly, as the apex of his hubris and his era of genuflecting to strongmen. That is, of course, assuming he survives the fallout of his attempt to privatize a chunk of the World Cup and re-emerges somewhat chastened and cautious, if either of those behaviors are still within his capacity. And if he makes it through another presidential election in March. But a second version of the Fifa peace prize holds genuine potential to highlight some of the good the sport occasionally does, to platform and recognize those who leverage soccer’s vast cultural influence to improve the lives of others. The magic of soccer is that it transcends the field and reflects cultures and geopolitics; it becomes anthropological ritual, spoken as the world’s common language. Sometimes, it transforms into a vessel for virtue. You could give the new prize to Afghan Women United for getting recognized as the official representatives of their country all while playing as refugees in exile. In June, they contested a pair of friendlies against the Cook Islands in New Zealand. They lost both matches, yes, but that’s beside the point. Their mere existence doubles as a towering protest against the Taliban, which has resumed its violent oppression of women since storming back into Kabul in 2021. You could give it to Ukrainian club Shakhtar Donetsk, for persevering and even thriving in spite of Russia’s invasion – either through proxies or outright – of their Donbas region a dozen years ago, forcing the club to play elsewhere ever since. Give it to former Spain international Juan Mata, for his work with Common Goal in convincing other players and managers to donate 1% of their earnings to charity; to Marcus Rashford, for shaming the Tory government into feeding children during a pandemic; to Sadio Mané, for bankrolling the construction of a hospital and other infrastructure projects in his native Senegal; to N’Golo Kanté for doing much the same in Mali. Give it to Scotland’s Tartan Army, for raising money for children’s charities wherever they play. Hell, give it to the England players for donating their match fees to charity causes since 2007, adding up to more than $6.7m (£5m). How would any of this relate to peace? Fair question. The peace prize could stand to be rebranded, the better to disassociate it from the least peaceful leader of a western nation in generations. It should probably have clearer qualifications and regulations, too, which is to say that it should have qualifications and regulations. And it’s probably best to shy away from the notion of steering entirely clear of politics. You can either have an award that acknowledges social good or you can be apolitical. You cannot do both. But that needn’t be a bad thing, if this prize is sincere in rewarding one of the sport’s best citizens – and so long as it serves more than the Fifa president’s selfish interests. Leander Schaerlaeckens is the author of The Long Game: US Men’s Soccer and Its Savage, Four-Decade Journey to the Top, or Thereabouts, which is out now. He teaches at Marist University.

Football News

Isaac appears to back current direction of world governing body But ‘premature’ to talk about support for Gianni Infantino Isaac’s sentiments come amid a global rebound in support for the embattled Fifa president, who at one stage appeared unlikely to be able to continue in his role following criticism led by officials in Europe and North America. The Swiss lawyer now enjoys backing from South America, Africa and growing chunks of Asia, which would represent a bloc large enough for him to win March’s Fifa presidential election. Continental powerbrokers are converging on Tokyo this week for the Asian Football Confederation congress. Fifa’s leadership and governance do not form part of the formal meeting agenda, but will be discussed by those present alongside the likelihood of January’s Asian Cup in Saudi Arabia going ahead. Isaac, the most senior football official in Australia, was asked about the situation at Fifa in an episode of a little-known sports business You Tube channel earlier this month that has been viewed fewer than 200 times. “We can look at it and be unsophisticated and say, what a mess,” he told Beyond the Game with Dillon and Rafael. “Or we can take a more responsible, mature view and say, you know what, these are growing pains.” Isaac pointed out that Fifa’s revenues have exploded in recent World Cup cycles, and “systems and processes” at the organisation may not have kept pace. He was adamant that the intentions and motivations of people in football are “always in the best interests” of the sport. “Maybe it’s not always aligned, but everyone involved in football really does want that, right? Everyone, at least in my experience and my interactions with them, that’s not even a question. So where has it become misaligned? Maybe it is in approach, maybe in communications and so forth.” FA’s previous statement on the controversial proposal dubbed Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE), issued in August, called for “clear and credible action” but stopped short of calling for Infantino’s resignation. It was broadly in line with a letter co-signed by Asian Football Confederation president Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al Khalifa which demanded from Fifa “leadership that serves football, not seeks to command it”. Since then Salman appears to have softened his stance against Infantino, instead calling for strengthened Fifa governance, as a growing bloc of Asian nations including Qatar and the UAE indicate support for the Fifa president. Isaac said people will criticise bodies like Fifa, AFC and Uefa but will not have the same knowledge of those within the system. “If I had the same information that most critics or the general public have, I would probably draw the same conclusions as them. But I don’t. I have a lot more information. I see a lot more that happens,” he said. “So when I reflect on Fifa and major institutions in football, I see a lot of the incredible work that they do, that confederations do, even our association [does], that goes unnoticed in supporting and serving and servicing different stakeholders, especially the ones that need the greatest help.” The missive follows last week’s meeting of the Fifa council in Zurich, the first since FFE came to light. Infantino listened to questions there, but declined to provide comprehensive answers, and called for questions in writing to be submitted before the next meeting in Doha on 16 December. Isaac said it was “premature” to talk about whether he would support Infantino at next year’s election. While he noted he has his “own views” – and he wanted to avoid being openly critical himself – he sees criticism of Fifa’s president as largely about “process”. “I’ve been encouraged that, right across the board, everyone is now focusing on that [process] with a view to, OK, let’s try and diagnose, what maybe could have been done differently or better, so that in future – and we codify it – so that in future we avoid it and what’s happened in this particular situation.”

Football News

European governing body gives two-week deadline Letter addresses other issues including Balogun affair A letter sent to Fifa’s general secretary, Mattias Grafström, by his counterpart at Uefa, Theodore ­Theodoridis, is accompanied by an eight-page document that has more than 50 questions about Fifa’s ­handling of dozens of issues over the past 12 months. These include the proposed sale of 20% of its commercial rights, the Folarin Balogun affair, the peace prize and relations with Donald Trump and the arrangements for next year’s Fifa presidential election. Uefa’s document also makes a number of allegations about potential conflicts of interests at Fifa, as well as repeating calls for a “genuinely independent” governance review. Uefa’s latest intervention ­follows last week’s meeting of the Fifa ­council in Zurich, the first time it had gathered since the emergence of the Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE) ­controversy in July. Infantino listened to questions on FFE and other ­matters, but declined to provide substantive answers, instead asking council members to submit them in writing before their next meeting in Doha on 16 December. In a letter sent on Monday, ­Theodoridis wrote: “These explanations have not begun ­satisfactorily to address a number of ­fundamental questions raised by Council members. “Others remain unanswered, and the information and documentation requested have not been provided. “Following the invitation made during the meeting to submit our questions in writing, we therefore enclose a consolidated set of questions and requests for information. “We formally request a substantive written response to each question, together with all ­supporting ­documentation by Monday 2nd November. Any refusal to disclose information or documents should be justified individually, with a clear explanation of the specific grounds relied upon. “These questions require answers now. They cannot be deferred until the next meeting of the Fifa Council – nor can future governance reforms substitute for scrutiny of decisions already taken and accountability for them.” The accompanying document and list of supplementary questions constitutes a damning takedown of Fifa’s leadership under Infantino, who, as it stands, is on course to be re-elected unopposed as president next year, although Uefa is increasingly hopeful of identifying a candidate to take him on before nominations close on 18 November. “A series of decisions, transactions and interventions involving the Fifa President, the President of the United States and individuals associated with him raise serious questions concerning potential conflicts of interest, transparency and institutional accountability,” Uefa states. The amount Fifa is paying to rent office space in Trump Tower is also queried, as is a report in the Times last week that Infantino in 2024 “received substantial additional remuneration which was not disclosed in Fifa’s annual report”. Fifa has said it “does not pay a second salary to the Fifa president and complies with all reporting requirements in relation to compensation”.

Football News

Backlash greeted award of prize to US president Donald Trump is likely to end up as the only political leader awarded the Fifa peace prize after Gianni Infantino was told at Thursday’s meeting of Fifa council to make major changes or scrap the controversial award. The Guardian has learned that several council members demanded the award be abolished and others called for the prize to be depoliticised, with Fifa’s football social responsibility committee to make a recommendation before the next council meeting in Doha on 16 December. Infantino announced the peace prize had been handed to the social responsibility committee at the start of Thursday’s meeting. Council members returned to the subject later in a series of questions about possible conflict of interests at Fifa. There is a strong view among council members that the peace prize in its current form is tainted by association with Trump, with some raising concerns that the US president could object and create a diplomatic storm if he does not like the identity of its next recipient. Fifa’s 22-person social responsibility committee is dominated by representatives from countries loyal to Infantino so abolition may be avoided on the grounds it would represent a humiliation for the Fifa president, although there is a widespread acceptance that change is required. One council member told the Guardian the most likely outcome discussed is the reinvention of the peace prize as an award for an individual within football who has delivered exceptional work promoting social harmony and responsibility, with a provision stating it cannot be given to a politician. Article two of Fifa’s statutes prohibits any political or governmental interference in football, one of several reasons why honouring Trump last year triggered such a backlash from many members. Trump was given the award at the men’s World Cup draw in Washington last December, with Infantino presenting the US president with a golden trophy, a medal and a certificate, but the process behind his selection has never been made public. The social responsibility committee is expected as part of its review to set strict parameters for any surviving award, and to provide details of a nomination and selection procedure.