All 104 matches of the 2026 World Cup will be “sold out”, FIFA president Gianni Infantino said on Feb 18, even though tickets are still available ahead of the tournament’s June 11 kick-off.

“The demand is there. Every match is sold out,” Infantino told CNBC.

Infantino, in an interview at US President Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, said that there had been 508 million ticket requests in four weeks for some seven million available tickets.

He said requests during the main sales phase in January came from more than 200 countries.

“(We’ve) never seen anything like that – incredible,” said Infantino, adding that football’s global governing body has kept “some tickets back” for the last-minute sales phase that will begin in April and run until the end of the World Cup on July 19.

Infantino addressed the issue of ticket prices, described as “exorbitant” by supporters’ associations, which have already reached record levels on resale sites.

As of Feb 11, a Category 3 seat – the highest section of the stands – for the tournament’s opening game between Mexico and South Africa at Mexico City’s Azteca Stadium on June 11 was listed at US$5,324 (S$6,700), compared to an original price of US$895.

One Category 3 seat for the World Cup final on July 19 at the MetLife Stadium in New Jersey, meanwhile, was being advertised for an eye-watering US$143,750 – more than 41 times its original face value of US$3,450.

The cheapest available ticket for the final on the resale site was listed at US$9,775.

“I think it is because it’s in America, Canada and Mexico,” Infantino said. “Everybody wants to be part of something special.

“Ticket prices have been fixed, but you have, in the US in particular, something called dynamic prices, meaning the prices will go up or down.

“You are able as well to resell your tickets on official platforms, secondary markets, so the prices as well will go up.

“That’s part of the market we are in.”

Ticketing has become one of the most controversial issues surrounding the World Cup, with fan groups around the world, such as Football Supporters Europe, accusing FIFA of a “monumental betrayal” over pricing.

That in turn prompted FIFA to introduce a sliver of tickets priced at US$60 for official supporters’ groups.

Critics maintain the cut-price category does not go far enough in addressing the problem.

Infantino estimated that the first 48-team World Cup would bring FIFA some US$11 billion or more in revenue, adding that “every dollar” will be reinvested in football in FIFA’s 211 member countries.

He put the World Cup’s impact on the US economy at around US$30 billion “in terms of tourism, catering, security investments and so on”.

Infantino estimated that in addition to seven million spectators, the World Cup would also attract 20 to 30 million tourists and create “185,000 full-time jobs”.

“It’s a big impact,” he said. “I hope this impact will not just be limited to the World Cup, but for the future as well.” 

-AFP

Join the Sports Village Square channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vaz7mEIGk1FxU8YIXb0H

By Kunle Solaja.

Nigerians on Tuesday began yet another anxious wait for a ruling from FIFA on the protest filed by the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) against the DR Congo Football Federation over the 2026 World Cup qualifying play-off.

Monday had been widely anticipated in football circles as “decision day,” but it ended in confusion, with conflicting and fake reports flooding social media platforms and some online outlets.

Throughout the day, unverified claims swung both ways, with some reports suggesting Nigeria had won the case and would be reinstated, while others alleged that FIFA had dismissed the protest. By late evening, however, no official statement had been issued by FIFA.

The source of information that a decision was to be made on Monday, 16 February not yet been verified as FIFA did not make any public statement regarding this.  

Meanwhile, the intercontinental play-off is slated to begin on 26 March and end on the 31^st in Mexico.

The NFF was reported to have dismissed the circulating claims, describing them as unfounded insinuations and reiterating that only an official communication from FIFA would clarify the situation.

The absence of a formal announcement created a vacuum quickly filled by speculation. Graphics purporting to show “FIFA verdicts” and fabricated disciplinary summaries were widely shared, deepening public uncertainty.

Observers note that FIFA’s judicial processes are not typically bound to publicly declared timelines, and decisions are often communicated directly to the parties involved before any broader release.

With no confirmation from Zurich, attention has now shifted to Tuesday, as supporters of the Super Eagles monitor developments for clarity.

What Is at Stake

Nigeria’s protest challenges the eligibility of certain DR Congo players who featured in the decisive African play-off match, which ended 1–1 before DR Congo triumphed 4–3 on penalties.

If FIFA rules in Nigeria’s favour, the Super Eagles could be reinstated into the intercontinental play-off tournament scheduled for March 2026 in Mexico,  a final pathway to the World Cup. A dismissal, however, would end Nigeria’s hopes of qualification through the play-off route.

Beyond sporting consequences, the outcome carries financial and reputational implications for Nigerian football, including potential revenue from participation and global exposure.

Another Day of Waiting

As Tuesday unfolds, the mood remains one of cautious anticipation rather than certainty. After Monday’s swirl of misinformation, many fans and stakeholders are adopting a wait-for-official-word stance.

For now, Nigeria’s World Cup fate hangs in administrative suspense — pending a decision that only FIFA can deliver.

Join the Sports Village Square channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vaz7mEIGk1FxU8YIXb0H

By Kunle Solaja.

In echoes of Waiting for Godot, the absurdist classic by Irish playwright Samuel Beckett, Nigerians spent Monday in anxious anticipation of a verdict that never came. As of 6 pm in Nigeria, which is the same as the winter time in Switzerland, the home office of FIFA has no information. Official hours have already ended.

Across social media platforms, radio stations and football circles, February 16 had been widely assumed to be “judgment day” in the protest lodged by the Nigeria Football Federation (NFF) against the DR Congo Football Federation (FECOFA) over alleged player ineligibility in the decisive African play-off for the 2026 World Cup.

Yet by nightfall, there was no official communication from FIFA, no confirmation of a ruling, and no clarity on how the date had become associated with a final decision.

The Substance of the Protest

The NFF’s petition, formally filed on December 15, 2025, challenges the eligibility of at least six DR Congo players who featured in the November 2025 African play-off final in Rabat, Morocco. Among those specifically named are Aaron Wan-Bissaka and Axel Tuanzebe, both of whom have previously represented England at youth levels before switching international allegiance.

Nigeria’s argument rests on two principal pillars:

• Irregular switches of nationality: The NFF questions whether the players’ changes of international allegiance complied fully with FIFA’s statutes governing eligibility.
• Dual citizenship concerns: Nigeria further contends that the players hold European passports, which it claims conflicts with Congolese nationality laws prohibiting dual citizenship, and alleges that clearances may have been secured through misrepresentation.

The match itself ended 1–1 after regulation time, with DR Congo prevailing 4–3 on penalties, thereby eliminating the Super Eagles from the African pathway to the 2026 World Cup.

FECOFA has firmly denied the allegations, insisting that the players satisfied FIFA’s connection requirements and were lawfully issued Congolese documentation.

Legal Complexity Beyond the Pitch

At the heart of the dispute lies a familiar tension between domestic nationality laws and FIFA’s eligibility framework.

Under FIFA regulations, players may switch national associations if they meet defined criteria related to ancestry, birthplace, or residency, and provided they have not been cap-tied at senior competitive level.

However, FIFA’s system does not automatically defer to the internal citizenship restrictions of sovereign states in the same manner as national courts might.

This creates a grey area: even if a country’s constitution restricts dual nationality, the determining authority for international football eligibility remains FIFA’s Players’ Status Committee and, where necessary, the FIFA Disciplinary Committee.

Legal analysts note that for Nigeria to prevail, it would need to demonstrate not only inconsistencies in domestic law but also procedural breaches within FIFA’s transfer-of-association process, a far higher evidentiary threshold.

Should FIFA rule in Nigeria’s favour, the consequences would be seismic.

The Super Eagles could be reinstated into the Intercontinental Play-off tournament scheduled for next month in Mexico. In that event, Nigeria would likely face the winner of the Jamaica versus New Caledonia fixture for a final berth at the 2026 World Cup.

Such a ruling would not only alter the competitive landscape but also carry significant financial and reputational implications. Participation in the intercontinental play-off offers substantial revenue opportunities and the prospect of global exposure ahead of a World Cup jointly hosted by the United States, Canada and Mexico.

Conversely, a dismissal of the protest would close Nigeria’s last competitive route to the tournament, intensifying scrutiny of administrative and technical decisions that led to elimination on the field.

For now, uncertainty prevails.

The absence of official confirmation regarding any verdict underscores the opaque nature of football’s judicial processes, where timelines are rarely publicised and rulings often emerge without advance notice.

As Monday ended without resolution, the atmosphere mirrored Beckett’s enduring metaphor — anticipation without arrival.

For Nigeria, the question remains not only whether justice will be served, but when — and in whose favour.

Join the Sports Village Square channel on WhatsApp: https://whatsapp.com/channel/0029Vaz7mEIGk1FxU8YIXb0H