South Australian Regional Drought Relief Grant Open

The FIFA World Cup 2026 is now over. Aside from the action and drama on the pitch, it is how FIFA performed off it which will dictate its lasting legacy.

Money talks

Projections for this year’s tournament placed total revenue at an eye-watering figure of AUD 16 billion (USD 11 billion); in the end, the number reached AUD 21 billion (USD 15 billion).

The newly-introduced hydration breaks – much bemoaned by fans accustomed to a more traditional 45 minute half – generated further income. Fox Sports was expected to earn more than AUD 356 million (USD 250 million) from these breaks alone, taking global revenue upwards of AUD 1.4 billion (USD 1 billion).

Four minutes and 20 seconds per match, worth more than 1 billion dollars. For FIFA, therefore, time truly is money.

As the most profitable World Cup in history, it also raises further questions (and potential ideas) for how to continue the success. FIFA President, Gianni Infantino, is already considering ways to “unleash the commercial potential and opportunity that FIFA has” going forward.

“I think I can say that this FIFA World Cup here in particular has opened a lot of doors, a lot of opportunities, a lot of possibilities,” Infantino said.

“This will have an impact on what we can do all over the world, but the revenues and the financial economic success come only if the sporting side is right.”

Expanded participation – marking the first time a World Cup features 48 teams compared to the previous 32 – was a major factor in increasing revenue. More teams, more games, more sponsorship and advertising opportunities.

“There are discussions about whether we should increase more (from 48) to 64 (teams), but this will be debated and this will be discussed,” Infantino affirmed.

More revenue for FIFA should also mean its 211 Member Associations also benefit from further investment, although details regarding this remain unknown.

Record-breaking attendance

Going into the tournament, the issue surrounding ticket prices was widespread. Many fans accused the governing body of pricing fans out of the game they love – and the numbers justified it.

While tickets opened at AUD 85 (USD 60), the dynamic pricing led to resales worth tens of thousands of dollars. For the final between Spain and Argentina, fans seeking last-minute tickets needed closer to AUD 3 million (USD 2 million).

But despite the criticism aimed at the dynamic pricing system, FIFA’s resolve paid off. Attendances smashed previous records, with total attendance double the figure seen in Qatar 2022.

FIFA reported that 6,810,966 fans packed into stadiums across the 104 matches, reaching an average crowd of 65,490. With higher attendances also comes more revenue generated from hospitality within the stadium itself.

Clearly, the price of a ticket to the world’s biggest sporting tournament does not affect demand. If FIFA sets the price, people will pay.

Or rather, people who can afford these prices will.

Red card, rescinded

As USA and Bosnia & Herzegovina went toe-to-toe in their round-of-32 clash, few could have known the drama would continue far beyond the referee’s whistle after 90 minutes.

A red card for star-striker, Folarin Balogun, in the 64th minute prompted concerns among US fans not only for the remaining half-an-hour of play, but for the following round of the tournament: as per FIFA rules, a player who receives a red card automatically misses the subsequent match.

This was the case for Balogun, until external pressure entered the field. And for football’s global governing body, external pressure arrived in the form of the President of the United States of America.

The legality over the rescinded red card is irrelevant to the wider issue. People will dispute the various articles outlined in the FIFA Disciplinary Code, but the incident itself sets a problematic precedent for football’s global governing body: if FIFA compromises its rules and political neutrality for one nation, where does it draw the line in future tournaments?

The tournament’s integrity had already come under pressure before a match had kicked-off, following the first ever FIFA Peace Prize awarded to President Trump in December 2025. The rescinded red card ultimately added fuel to the fire.

A game of two halves

The FIFA World Cup 2026 was as entertaining on the pitch as it was controversial off it.

It featured some incredible individual performances from stars like Mbappe and Kane, as well as Cabo Verde’s Vozinha – the 40 year-old overnight sensation who became a tournament icon.

308 goals were scored, surpassing with flying colours the previous record of 172 in 2022. A goal-per-game ratio fo 2.96 was the highest in recorded history since 1970.

Celebrations like Norway’s ‘Viking Row’ took the world by storm, and several brands including Levi’s, Gillette and Under Armour (the latter being the tournament-winning boot sponsorship) enjoyed huge public attention online for their unique marketing approaches.

These are the stories which represent the World Cup at its very best and the side of football fans want to see: action-packed matches, world-class talent, inspirational underdog stories and moments which generate discussions between fans from all over the world.

Beyond the pitch, however, memories of this year’s tournament will be comprised of financial success marred by a failure to govern and uphold the game’s integrity throughout.

It is a disappointing contradiction, that the cost of the most entertaining and economically successful World Cup in history, is the growing concern whether we can believe in those delivering the game to us at all.