The FIFA Club World Cup exposed some significant issues that could hamper the 2026 World Cup, with hot weather being among the top concerns.
Six weeks ago in Munich, Paris Saint-Germain overwhelmed one of Europe’s top teams in the UEFA Champions League final, earning a trophy and recognition as the world’s best club team.
On Sunday in East Rutherford, N.J., PSG handed that mantle to Chelsea, which routed the exhausted Parisians 3-0 in the FIFA Club World Cup final, PSG’s worst loss in nearly two years.
So ended the first expanded Club World Cup, a tournament manufactured mainly to monetize the sport while lengthening the season six weeks for some teams — both PSG and Chelsea were playing for the 65th time in 48 weeks — and further congesting an already crowded schedule for others. And though it attracted more than 2.4 million fans overall, more than a quarter of the games drew fewer than 17,000 people, four got less than 9,000 and the competition overall averaged about the same attendance as the top 25 summer friendlies played in the U.S. last summer.
Read more:Chelsea overwhelms Paris Saint-Germain to win FIFA Club World Cup title
That’s after FIFA, the event’s organizer, drastically reduced ticket prices and, in some cases, let people in for free. So why did we play this tournament at all?
Well, the best answer is the Club World Cup served as a dress rehearsal for the real World Cup, which will be played at the same time and in some of the same stadiums next year. And if what FIFA learned from the club tournament doesn’t force it back to the drawing board to make some major changes for next summer — especially to kickoff times — it will be an education wasted.
The biggest takeaway was the weather. It was way too hot (and humid and stormy and just generally yucky).
Chelsea played three of its seven games in temperatures described by local weather authorities as “extreme,” meaning people were told to avoid strenuous physical activity or, in some cases, to even avoid going outdoors. (Sunday’s final kicked off in 81-degree temperatures and 69% humidity, conditions that necessitated two hydration breaks.)
“The heat is incredible,” Chelsea midfielder Enzo Fernandez said in Spanish before the final. “The other day I got a bit dizzy during a play. I had to lie down on the ground because I was dizzy. Playing in this temperature is very dangerous.”
But it’s not just the danger to players FIFA should worry about (although that, clearly, is paramount). The conditions also change the way the game must be played, making it far less attractive to viewers.
“The speed of the game is not the same. Everything becomes very slow,” Fernandez said. “Let’s hope that next year they change the schedule.”
For the Club World Cup, many games started at midday or in the early afternoon so they could be broadcast in prime time in Europe and Africa. But the conditions on the field were often oppressive as a result.
MetLife Stadium, where Sunday’s final was played, will host eight World Cup matches, including the final, next summer. And while the kickoff times for that tournament won’t be revealed until the World Cup draw in December, BBC Sport said it has learned FIFA plans to start many East Coast games at noon, 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. local time.
FIFA issued a statement earlier this month that suggested it is not taking the problem near seriously enough, touting the hydration breaks, in which matches are halted so players can get a drink, as “significant and progressive measures ... being taken to protect the players from the heat.”
FIFPRO, the union representing international soccer players, isn’t being so dismissive.
Read more:News Analysis: U.S. lost the Gold Cup final to Mexico, but Mauricio Pochettino still earned a win
"From a health and safety perspective, this [extreme heat] is something that must take priority over commercial interests with regards to the safety of the players," Alexander Bielefeld, the union’s director of policy and strategic relations, said on a conference call. “Heat conditions are not happening in a vacuum. The debate on extreme heat is not happening in a vacuum.
“It's actually quite foreseeable."
According to FIFPRO, at least three games at the Club World Cup should have been suspended or postponed because of extreme weather. It was so hot during a group-play game in Cincinnati, in fact, Borussia Dortmund’s bench players stayed in the locker room, watching the first half on TV.
The last World Cup that played in the U.S., in 1994, remains the hottest in history, which is remarkable for a tournament that since been played in Africa and the Middle East. That year Mexico and Ireland faced off in Orlando, Fla., where midday temperatures hit 105 degrees. And it was 100 degrees on the field for the final, which kicked off at noon at the Rose Bowl. (Not surprisingly that game ended in a scoreless draw, as did the 1999 Women’s World Cup final, played at the Rose Bowl under equally as oppressive conditions. Both games were decided in penalty kicks.)
More severe weather is all but certain next year.
“What you’re seeing right now is very typical,” Ben Schott, operations chief with the National Weather Service, told the Athletic. “Next year we may be going through the same thing.
That’s not good since a half-dozen Club World Cup games were delayed or halted by weather this summer, including Chelsea’s round-of-16 win over Benfica in Charlotte, N.C. That match was paused for two hours because of lightning.
Read more:Far from the Gold Cup, Christian Pulisic connects with youth soccer players who inspire him
“I can understand that for security reasons, you have to suspend the game,” Chelsea manager Enzo Maresca said. “But if you suspend seven, eight games, that means that probably is not the right place to do this competition."
FIFA had a chance to protect its most valuable property, the World Cup final, by scheduling it for one of the four roofed stadiums chosen to host games in the U.S. in 2026. Instead it will tempt fate — and the weather gods — by playing the final at open-air MetLife.
If there were a silver lining to these storm clouds — I’m trying to be positive here — it’s that coaches and players are now keenly aware of what awaits them next summer, giving them ample time to get ready.
“We’re going to come prepared next year,” said Inter Milan’s Marcus Thuram, a French international. “There’s a lot of players that are doing the Club World Cup that will be doing the World Cup with their countries next year. So I think it’s a good preparation.”
Let’s hope FIFA is preparing as well. Because if the heat was on for the Club World Cup, it will be even warmer for the organizers of the real World Cup next summer.
⚽ You have read the latest installment of On Soccer with Kevin Baxter. The weekly column takes you behind the scenes and shines a spotlight on unique stories. Listen to Baxter on this week’s episode of the “Corner of the Galaxy” podcast.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Category: General Sports
