Soccer
The 2026 FIFA World Cup draw was a stunning own goal of self-love and sycophancy with a Trumped-up ‘peace prize’ – all in the service of further monetising the world game. By Martin McKenzie-Murray.
FIFA awards Trump a free kick
Perhaps the only surprise about the gauche, clumsy and extravagantly long FIFA World Cup draw last week was that it occurred in Washington, DC’s Kennedy Center and not Trump International Hotel Las Vegas. To have held it in the bright and shameless city would have perfectly complemented an occasion principally given not to the draw of next year’s tournament but to the flattery of the United States president.
The 2026 men’s World Cup will begin in June and be played across the bordering countries of Mexico, Canada and the US, but such was the sycophancy shown to Donald Trump by FIFA that evening, the host status of America’s neighbours might’ve been lost on a casual observer. In fact, earlier this year, FIFA became a tenant of the US president when it established an office in Trump Tower in New York City.
An exceptionally generous person may conclude that FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s servility to the US president is but the practical acknowledgement of flattery’s effectiveness on Trump – and that to service his pathological appetite for it is simply one way of immunising oneself against his rages.
This would be very generous indeed. Infantino’s flattery, expressed by a man who leads an organisation even more notorious for graft and dubious patronage than Trump’s own businesses, long ago acquired a gratuitous quality. So much so, that the former head of FIFA’s ethics committee says he’s guilty of breaching the organisation’s requirement of political neutrality.
It’s easy to see why. In October, the day before the Nobel Committee awarded its peace prize to the Venezuelan opposition leader, Infantino posted to social media: “President Donald J. Trump definitely deserves the Nobel Peace Prize for his decisive actions.”
In November, while speaking at the American Business Forum in Miami, Infantino described Trump as a close friend. “He does what he says,” Infantino said. “He says what he thinks. He actually says what many people think as well, but maybe don’t dare to say, and that’s why he’s so successful. I have to say it: I’m a bit surprised sometimes when we read some negative comments [about him] … So I think we should all support what he’s doing because I think it’s looking pretty good.”
Apparently sharing Trump’s disappointment that he didn’t win the Nobel Peace Prize, or perhaps just seeing an opportunity to soothe Trump’s pain at losing, Infantino recently confected a FIFA Peace Prize to be awarded at the draw.
The prize was created without the consultation of the FIFA board, much less its congress of 221 members. Its judges (if the plural is indeed even appropriate here) and their criteria remain unclear. The prize is utterly mysterious – that is, except for the identity of its recipient, whom Infantino had hinted weeks before would be Trump.
And so it was. “This is your peace prize!” Infantino said as he shook Trump’s hand, bestowed a medallion and then conferred the ghastly trophy. It is a golden ball/globe, underneath which are several hands reaching toward it, presumably a representation of the world held in the hands of some fine and peaceable leaders, but which reminded me of cherished things being throttled by grasping sycophants like Infantino.
The laurelling of Trump still not done, a video played: “Peace creates hope and football translates that hope into unity,” it said. “We honour a dynamic leader who has engaged in diplomatic efforts that create opportunities for dialogue, de-escalation and stability and who has championed the unifying power of football on the world stage.”
I’ve said this before, but it bears repeating: fuck FIFA. This is an organisation that has yielded more corruption than many crime families; an organisation typically run by the acme of personality disorders. Unctuous, shameless and conveniently servile men whose distribution of billions in revenue has been only slightly less mysterious than the judging criteria for its peace prize.
In May, to mark the 10th anniversary of Swiss police, in cooperation with the US State Department, arresting seven FIFA executives on charges of corruption – an investigation that resulted in 50 related arrests – the group FairSquare released a statement on FIFA governance signed by dozens of academics, authors and whistleblowers.
The group, a non-profit organisation registered in London but comprising various human rights researchers and lawyers from around the world, said: “It is time to recognise that these reforms have failed to usher in a new era of responsible governance at FIFA and that the organisation is structurally unfit to govern world football. FIFA is arguably more poorly governed today than it was 10 years ago.
“The reason for this failure is that the reforms that began in 2016 did not address the key structural flaws at the root of many of FIFA’s governance problems, most notably the deeply problematic power dynamic between the organisation’s executive branch and its member associations. FIFA redistributes a large proportion of the revenue it generates to its member associations and confederations. There is little verifiable evidence to show that the primary impact of this redistribution has been the development of the game, and considerable evidence to suggest its main purpose has been to ensure the loyalty and allegiance of member associations. The power of its most senior and powerful officials is rooted in this model of patronage, which disincentivises ethical conduct and precludes effective internal reform.”
The world game doesn’t need rent seekers to promote itself, nor does it require administrators who’ve mistaken themselves for gods to enhance soccer’s romanticism. If we can put aside the decades of flagrant corruption, this might be my prevailing point of disgust with FIFA: never is there a sense of humble custodianship. Instead, we receive the odious platitudes of fevered egos – self-absorbed cretins whose defining feature is their attraction to power and glamour.
The 2026 FIFA World Cup will be the largest in history, increasing to 48 teams from the 32 that have comprised the tournament since France 1998. FIFA now proposes that the 2030 World Cup feature 64 teams – almost a third of all member countries.
There are obvious and legitimate arguments for and against such massive expansion. Commending it is the fact that major countries are unlikely to ever miss out again (Italy, four-time winners, have failed to qualify for the two previous tournaments and are yet to qualify for the next one), while more countries will be introduced to the thrill of participating in this global party – and the shortened odds of qualification might mean greater domestic investment in the game.
The arguments against it are just as obvious: to have a third of the world qualify undermines the prestige of the tournament and will likely significantly dilute the quality of football – most acutely in the initial group stage.
You can be sure, however, Infantino has his eye on one benefit: revenue. More games and participant countries means more money from tickets and broadcast rights, and it’s these billions of dollars – earnt tax free – that form the basis of his power and the dubious networks of patronage past.
The coaches of the 42 countries that have so far qualified must have been eager for the draw to be completed, so as to begin strategising. But they were seriously disappointed. There were performances from Andrea Bocelli, Robbie Williams and, rather surprisingly, Lauryn Hill – who, even more surprisingly, was punctual and didn’t take the opportunity to riff on the tyranny of taxation. There was an ill-suited pair of hosts – model Heidi Klum and comedian Kevin Hart – who bumbled charmlessly through excruciating gags. There was FIFA’s outsized self-love, and fondness for expressing it with empty sentimentality.
You might suspect the following is parody, but it’s a genuine quote from Infantino’s opening speech: “Welcome in all the languages of the world, and of course in the language of football as well, which is the language of passion, which is the language of love, which is the language of happiness,” he said. “Because you should know that FIFA is the official happiness provider for humanity for over 100 years.”
Well, I’d suggest it was the footballers who brought the happiness (and heartbreak), but certainly FIFA has brought overwhelming happiness to those greasy few who received generous kickbacks over the years. That is, if yachts and gold jewellery are a metric for happiness.
The world game remains a worldwide graft, but FIFA can always bank on its chief “product” – the World Cup – generating genuine excitement, unity and cherished memories among its fans. In future, we may just have to enjoy those things under the banner of “FIFA: Official Happiness Provider to Humanity”.
This article was first published in the print edition of The Saturday Paper on December 13, 2025 as "Donald’s free kick".
For almost a decade, The Saturday Paper has published Australia’s leading writers and thinkers. We have pursued stories that are ignored elsewhere, covering them with sensitivity and depth. We have done this on refugee policy, on government integrity, on robo-debt, on aged care, on climate change, on the pandemic.
All our journalism is fiercely independent. It relies on the support of readers. By subscribing to The Saturday Paper, you are ensuring that we can continue to produce essential, issue-defining coverage, to dig out stories that take time, to doggedly hold to account politicians and the political class.
There are very few titles that have the freedom and the space to produce journalism like this. In a country with a concentration of media ownership unlike anything else in the world, it is vitally important. Your subscription helps make it possible.
Subscriber exclusive
Send this article to a friend for free.
Share this subscriber exclusive article with a friend or family member using share credits.
