In Mexico, outcry over water extraction and environmental damage linked to World Cup projects has been loud.
La Gazzetta dello Sport ran a double page calling the World Cup a “disaster,” citing ticket prices, Balogun, weather, increased games, and decreased rest.
>>> Civil Rights Groups Sue HHS Over Childcare Funding Records
The newspaper then found its ticket allocation for the final slashed from five to two.
The idea that a media outlet could be denied access for rejecting the official narrative that this was the greatest World Cup ever is dystopian.
FIFA's contemptuous attitude toward the media was evident throughout.
Basic organization and facilities were the worst for at least six World Cups.
Fans are treated as revenue units to be milked mercilessly; the media as an irritating imposition.
On-Field Action: Good but Not Great
The football was good but not great.
There were fine and dramatic games – Brazil v Japan, Morocco v Netherlands, England v Mexico, Argentina v Cape Verde, Norway v Côte d'Ivoire, Belgium v Senegal, Norway v Brazil, Argentina v Egypt – but almost all were in the last 32 or last 16.
The quarter-finals were not especially inspiring.
Argentina's win over England in the semi was thrilling and involved a collapse that will be discussed for years.
Spain's win over France was too easy, establishing superiority that was never challenged.
The final was dismal.
The right team won in their familiar bloodless way, but the grim spectacle was a direct consequence of the indulgence shown Argentina earlier in the tournament.
The ending colors what went before and drags this tournament behind 2022 and 2018, let alone the glorious World Cups of the 1980s or 1998.
Posterity can judge where exactly in the middle rank it sits.
>>> Wildfire Smoke Crosses US-Canada Border Amid Tariff Threats
It was not great but it was good. Beyond the FIFA bluster, that's fine.
