“I didn't know what the hell a red card was. When I found out, I said, you got to be kidding,” Trump said.

Balogun was dismissed in the second half of the United States' 2-0 win on July 1 after the Video Assistant Referee (VAR) alerted the referee to a high challenge on a Bosnia and Herzegovina defender.

Trump argued that the challenge did not warrant a sending-off.

“I understand sports really well, really well. And that wasn't a foul. That wasn't even an infraction,” he said.

The US president also criticised the referee, describing him as “very suspect” while making indirect references to his “past.”

“I don't like to create controversy,” Trump added.

Explaining why he contacted FIFA, Trump questioned the automatic suspension that accompanies a straight red card.

“It's one thing to penalise somebody for the game but how do you penalise them for a game that hasn't been played yet. It's very unfair you can't do that so yes I asked for a review by FIFA. I spoke to a man who's highly respected and by the way whose level of respect has gone up tenfold and he was good before this started.”

Trump insisted he did not pressure FIFA to overturn the decision.

“I'm very glad all I did was ask for a review. I didn't say, you have to do this,” he said.

FIFA later suspended the automatic one-match ban, allowing Balogun to play in the United States' Round of 16 match against Belgium. The governing body said the suspension would be held in abeyance for one year under a disciplinary probation provision.

The decision prompted criticism from some fans and commentators, who questioned the consistency of FIFA's disciplinary process and the influence of political intervention in football .

The 2026 FIFA World Cup, hosted by the United States , Mexico and Canada, has also faced scrutiny over issues including travel restrictions affecting some participating teams and officials, as well as debate over ticket prices, travel costs and the use of hydration breaks during matches.

Long before kick-off, football collided with immigration policy . Iranian supporters faced uncertainty over travel, while FIFA revoked the Iranian federation's ticket allocation without public explanation. Ghanaian fans applied for Canadian visitor visas in large numbers, yet only a small proportion were approved. Elsewhere, players and officials encountered their own obstacles. Iraqi striker Aymen Hussein was detained on arrival before eventually being allowed through. A Somali referee, despite holding valid travel documents, was reportedly turned back at the border.

For some teams, preparation meant training sessions and tactical meetings. For others, it also meant navigating visa applications, airport questioning and the possibility of being refused entry altogether.

The barriers did not end there. FIFA promoted a more inclusive tournament, yet many supporters found ticket prices far beyond what had originally been expected. Hydration breaks, introduced in response to the summer heat, have also prompted debate, with some researchers arguing the pauses are too short to provide meaningful cooling while creating additional opportunities for advertising.

None of these issues alone proves that football itself is unfair. Together, however, they raise a broader question. Can a tournament truly call itself global if borders, passports and wealth increasingly determine who can participate?

And yet the story of this World Cup is not simply one of exclusion.

African teams have delivered some of the tournament's most memorable performances. Nine reached the Round of 32, while Morocco once again demonstrated that its run in Qatar was no one-off. Cape Verde, making its World Cup debut, captured attention through the performances of its 40-year-old goalkeeper, whose displays became one of the defining stories of the competition.

That is the paradox of this World Cup. It has showcased the widest range of footballing talent the tournament has ever seen. But it has also exposed how uneven the road to the pitch can be. If the World Cup is meant to belong to the world, then participation must be about more than qualification alone.

World Reframed episode 43

Click here to watch our previous episodes

World Reframed is produced in London by Global South World, part of the Impactum Group. Its editors are Duncan Hooper and Ismail Akwei.

ISSN 2978-4891

For the first time in World Cup history, 48 nations will compete for the trophy, expanding the tournament from its traditional 32-team format. The expansion means more countries, more matches, and more opportunities for teams to make history.

The tournament will also be the first to be hosted by three countries. The United States will stage matches across 11 venues, while Mexico will host games in three cities and Canada in two. The competition will run until 19 July 2026, with the final scheduled for MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey. The opening match will see Mexico face South Africa at the Estadio Azteca in Mexico City.

The expanded tournament will feature 104 matches, a significant increase from the previous 64. Teams will be divided into 12 groups of four, with the top two teams from each group advancing, along with the eight best third-placed teams. Those 32 teams will then move into a newly introduced Round of 32 knockout stage.

The list of qualified teams includes some of football’s most successful nations. Former champions Brazil , Argentina, Germany, France, England, Spain and Uruguay are all back. Brazil arrives as the tournament’s most successful nation and is identified as a five-time World Cup winner.

Several countries that have reached World Cup finals without lifting the trophy are also in the field, including Croatia, the Netherlands, Sweden and Czechia.

Among the teams with semifinal appearances in their history are Morocco, the United States, Austria, Belgium, South Korea, Portugal and Türkiye. Morocco enters the tournament as the highest-ranked African team, ranked eighth in the world.

Other nations, including Senegal, Switzerland, Mexico, Colombia , Ghana and Paraguay, will be aiming to improve on previous quarter-final appearances.

The tournament also features a large group of countries that have never gone beyond the quarter-finals. Among them are Japan, Australia, Algeria, Norway, Ecuador, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, South Africa , Egypt, Scotland, Canada, IR Iran, Iraq, DR Congo, Haiti, New Zealand, Panama, Qatar, Côte d'Ivoire, and Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Some teams are returning after long absences. Scotland is back at the World Cup for the first time since 1998, while Iraq returns for the first time since 1986.

Perhaps the biggest stories, however, belong to four nations that will experience the World Cup for the first time. Cabo Verde, Curaçao, Jordan and Uzbekistan have all secured historic debuts and will be making their first appearances on football’s biggest stage.

In a recent remark, Trump said he preferred using the term “soccer” in the United States because of the country’s association with American football.

“I call it soccer,” Trump said. “It’s just easier to do, because we have football and they have two footballs.”

The comment contrasted with an earlier statement Trump made during a FIFA World Cup event, where he argued the sport should instead be called “football”.

“When you think about it, shouldn’t it really be called football? This is football, there’s no question about it,” Trump said at the time.

He also joked that the National Football League (NFL) might need to adopt a different name if the United States were to follow the terminology commonly used across much of the world.

Outside the United States, the sport is widely referred to as football, while “American football” is used to distinguish the NFL and related competitions. The term “soccer” remains dominant in the US, where the NFL continues to be the country’s most popular sports league.

Trump’s remarks come as FIFA intensifies preparations for the 2026 World Cup, which will be jointly hosted by the United States, Canada and Mexico from June 11 to July 19.

“They asked us if they can stay overnight in Mexico. And we said yes, there is no problem, we have no issue with it. So, they are looking for the venue to be in Tijuana, so that they can stay overnight and travel to the games that will take place in the United States . So, we have no reason to deny them the possibility of staying in Mexico,” the Mexican president stated.

Iran is scheduled to play all three of its group-stage matches in the United States during the 2026 FIFA World Cup. According to Sheinbaum, US authorities reportedly do not want the team based in the country between matches.

The proposed arrangement would likely see the Iranian team staying in Tijuana, a Mexican border city near Southern California , while travelling into the United States for matches.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup will be jointly hosted by the United States, Mexico, and Canada. The tournament is expected to involve complex travel and coordination arrangements as teams move across North America for the expanded competition.

The projections highlight how climate change could reshape weather patterns across parts of Asia, with some cities expected to face simultaneous temperature increases and declining annual rainfall.

A visual analysis published by World Visualized, based on the climate research, identified Yangon, Manila and Jakarta among the cities projected to face some of the sharpest combinations of rising heat and falling precipitation by mid-century.

Yangon, formerly known as Rangoon, could experience average temperatures rising by about 5.9 degrees Celsius alongside a projected annual rainfall decline of roughly 162 millimetres.

Manila is projected to warm by approximately 3.9 degrees Celsius while losing around 155 millimetres of annual precipitation, while Jakarta could see temperatures increase by 3.1 degrees Celsius with rainfall decreasing by nearly 196 millimetres.

Climate scientists warn that hotter and drier conditions could intensify drought risks, strain water supplies and increase the frequency of heat-related illnesses in densely populated urban areas.

Other cities highlighted in the projections, including Hiroshima, Taipei and Macau, are expected to become significantly drier even with more moderate temperature increases.

Meanwhile, Tehran, Tashkent and Jaipur are projected to experience some of the sharpest temperature increases in the study despite relatively smaller declines in rainfall. Tehran could warm by more than 6 degrees Celsius under high-emissions scenarios by 2050.

The findings align with broader warnings from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has repeatedly identified Asia as one of the regions most vulnerable to climate-related disasters, including extreme heat, flooding, droughts and food insecurity.

According to the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), Asia has warmed faster than the global average in recent decades, with climate impacts increasingly affecting economic productivity, infrastructure and public health.

Cities such as Jakarta and Manila already face major environmental pressures linked to flooding, sea-level rise and rapid urbanisation. Experts warn that reduced rainfall combined with rising temperatures could place additional stress on energy systems and drinking water supplies.

Urban planners and climate researchers say governments across Asia may need to accelerate investment in heat-resilient infrastructure, sustainable water management and climate adaptation policies to reduce long-term risks.

The projections also reinforce concerns that developing countries in Asia could face disproportionate economic and social consequences from climate change despite contributing less historically to global greenhouse gas emissions.

But as excitement builds ahead of the tournament, there are a few things that might put a dampener on how fans and die-hard supporters, especially from Africa, or even tourists, experience this global spectacle.  

Out of the ten African countries that have qualified for the World Cup, Cote d’Ivoire and Senegal face a partial suspension of visa issuance following the coming into effect on January 1, 2026, of the Presidential Proclamation 10998. 

A note on the US embassy in Senegal’s website reminds Senegalese that in line with the Presidential Proclamation, Senegalese “may still submit visa applications and attend scheduled interviews, but they may be ineligible for visa issuance or admission to the United States.” 

While securing a visa is key to experiencing the tournament, it might probably be a less herculean feat compared to securing a ticket to enter a stadium in any of the 11 host cities in the United States. 

Billed as the biggest World Cup tournament yet, with 48 teams and over 100 matches, it has also been described by critics as the most expensive. Following a reported surge in interest for tickets after the group stage draw in December last year, ticket prices are said to have doubled or, in some cases, tripled compared to pricing for previous tournaments. 

With three main price tiers or categories of tickets, fans can expect to pay from as low as $400 (Category 3) to as much as $2,735 for a ticket for a group stage match, depending on one’s preference. There are also limited $60 tickets for supporters and another category, the Front category, whose group stage prices go as high as up to $4,000.  

If these figures feel a bit over the top, you’re not the only one feeling that way. Last Thursday, the New York Post published a story about its interview with US President Donald Trump about the cost of tickets for the country’s opening game against Paraguay on June 12. Tickets for that match start from around $1,120. 

“I did not know that number,” the New York Post quoted President Trump as saying about the cost. “I would certainly like to be there, but I wouldn’t pay it either, to be honest with you.”  

Resale prices for tickets to the final match are reportedly available for a little over $2 million dollars per ticket. FIFA President Gianni Infantino, who has defended his organisation’s ticket pricing regime, was quoted by the New York Post as saying he would personally deliver “a hot dog and a Coke” to anyone who shelled out millions for the final match.

A press release in April from the U.S. Travel Association indicated that its research showed that the World Cup had the “extraordinary potential to deliver major economic gains for communities across the country.” The release also noted that “safety concerns, policy perceptions and entry barriers could limit America ’s ability to fully capitalise on the opportunity.”

Besides concerns raised about the potential for a terror attack during the tournament due to the war between the US, Israel and Iran, since January, there have been calls for a boycott of the event, largely from figures in Europe, including former FIFA President, Sepp Blatter. Most of these calls are based on US military action in Venezuela , immigration enforcement, and visa restrictions, which affect countries like Cote d’Ivoire, Haiti, Iran and Senegal, countries that have all qualified for the tournament. 

A report on the World Cup hotel outlook by the American Hotel and Lodging Association (AHLA) released on May 4 noted the anticipated demand for hotels in the United States “has not translated into strong hotel bookings”. 

The report, based on a survey of hoteliers across the 11 host cities in the US, found that domestic travellers “are outpacing international visitors.” The report identified FIFA room block cancellations, international travel barriers, and broader geographical concerns as “key drivers of softened hotel demand”. Hotels with leisure demand or those operating in cities with confirmed team base camps have, however, seen a meaningful increase in demand. 

New York City, one of the host cities, appears to be somewhat in the middle of the pack of cities doing okay with international visitors. In an emailed response to my query, the New York City Hospitality Alliance sounded upbeat despite the outlook from AHLA.

“We’re confident the World Cup will bring energy, visitors, and economic activity to New York City. Bars and restaurants will be at the centre of that experience, with locals and visitors gathering to watch matches and celebrate. We’ll continue working with the City and our partners to ensure small businesses are prepared to make the most of this opportunity,” said Andrew Rigie, Executive Director of the New York City Hospitality Alliance.

While the US is not the only host nation, it has the most host cities - 11 of 16 - of the three countries hosting the tournament. This means, invariably, each of the ten African countries participating in the tournament will play at least one match in the United States. What does that then mean for countries like Côte d’Ivoire and Senegal?

They may have to depend on their diaspora populations in the US to cheer them in the manner only Africans can. But that may probably be a luxury some of these diasporan fans may not be able to afford, considering the ticket prices and the location of their matches.

For instance, for Senegalese living in New York’s Harlem, a train ride to the MetLife Stadium in New Jersey should not be a problem at all. But the real question is, would that fan be willing to cough up at least $500 to pay for a ticket to see the Teranga Lions play France in a stadium, or would they rather opt for the nearest bar or viewing centre to cheer them on?  

The opinions and thoughts expressed in this article reflect only the author's views.

Nii Akrofi Smart-Abbey is an award-winning international journalist, writer, and host of the A55 Podcast. Nii Akrofi has worked with local and international media in Ghana , Congo and the United States. He has contributed to news platforms like Zenger News, Africanews, W42ndST, and foreignpresscorrespondents.com.