Wang Qinbo: Start with "recommendation of Chinese team into the World Cup"

Sports Weekly All-Media Reporter Wang Qinbo

There is a common problem in media in many countries around the world: eating ready-made meals, especially keen on following the rhythm of English media. Whenever the British and American media create a topic gimmick, the "international communication" of various countries will rush to carry it and then start to follow the trend and hype.

But if there are some key issues that British and American media choose to avoid talking about out of self-protection, can media in other countries still pay due attention?

As for world football, there is a question that needs to be faced seriously at the moment: Does the United States have the ability to ensure the normal holding of the 2026 World Cup? If not, should an alternative be proposed?

This is a question that is almost undiscussed, because few mainstream media dare to raise the possibility of "canceling the right to host the US World Cup." The reality that must be faced is: Is the social unrest and governance problems currently facing the United States less controversial than before the 2022 Qatar World Cup? You should know that the discussion on "whether the Qatar World Cup should be cancelled" continued until the eve of the game. Now, doubts about the ability of the United States hosting are almost lost.

It must be admitted that no country in the world is perfect, and almost every World Cup host has faced external doubts.

If you talk about the most unstoppable example of the World Cup, Argentina in 1978 may be a typical example. At that time, the Argentine military government was carrying out bloody suppression on its own people, and the World Cup finals were even close to the military machinery school that detained and killed dissidents. Even so, the World Cup was still held in Argentina as scheduled. One of the important reasons is that the Argentine military regime is supported by the US government, and Kissinger, the "old friend of the Argentine people", personally stood up for the military regime.

Precisely because the "perfect host" does not exist, the World Cup should have focused more on the technical level. But the reality is that in the face of various technical difficulties in 2026, the United States lacks both solutions and the willingness to respond actively.

Recently, when Paris Saint-Germain, Atletico Madrid and other teams arrived in Los Angeles to participate in the Club World Cup preparations, Spanish and French journalists investigated and found that many local American football fans, especially Latino citizens, were arrested by the Immigration and Customs Enforcement Bureau for abuse of power, and even dared not go to the scene to watch the game - even if they hold American passports.

This concern about law enforcement abuse has obviously also affected international fans who plan to go to the United States to watch the World Cup. At the same time, the intensification of conflicts between California local governments and federal law enforcement has further aggravated the outside world's doubts about the safety and security of the event.

It should be pointed out that the United States will host 78 of the 104 games in the 2026 World Cup, and is expected to attract about 6.5 million people to watch the game, most of which will come from overseas. For Latin American countries that have always been keen on the World Cup, such as Argentina, Brazil, Colombia and Mexico, they are not on the US signature-free list, and the visa issue is particularly critical. Jeff Freeman, president of the American Travel Association, recently warned that visa appointments from the key countries could last up to several months.

And FIFA's current attitude is almost unconditional inclusion to the US government. FIFA President Infantino is an open Trump supporter and even the only footballer to attend Trump's inauguration ceremony. He also included Giuliani's son in the assistant team. Infantino said FIFA has no right to interfere with the host country's immigration policies, but they are working with federal agencies to try to facilitate fans as much as possible in visa and entry arrangements.

However, ironically, the newly issued "travel ban" by the United States covers citizens of 19 countries and prohibits them from entering the country, including Iran, which has advanced to the World Cup. Although athletes and team members are exempt, fans are not listed. This means that the US government can legally deprive Iranian fans of the right to watch the game on site, and FIFA chose to acquiesce.

In addition, the New York Times also disclosed that immigration policies have directly affected the recruitment of personnel in World Cup-related positions. Due to visa restrictions, many experienced professionals have been rejected for applications, and the US government questioned why they cannot hire their own people to replace them.

All these realistic and pressing questions should at least prompt the media to be brave enough to ask: Is the United States still suitable to host the 2026 World Cup? Should we consider transferring the sponsorship rights to other countries?

Even if such questions are destined to have no result, they should be raised - this is a reciprocal counterattack and a due challenge to the monopoly of British and American discourse.

Chinese media can even boldly propose: hand over the hosting rights of the United States to China, and at the same time obtain the host's automatic promotion qualification. The problem is that this awareness of proactive voice is absent. British and American media do not set the pace, and media in other countries are "not too lazy to think"; while when there is a lack of topics worth following, the country is keen on spreading nonsense rumors like "the Chinese team was recommended to the World Cup" and entertain themselves.