A World Cup boycott over Trump? Football's hypotheticals cannot be dismissed any more | Nick Ames

"Could European countries really decide to boycott the World Cup this summer? It is an astonishing question to be asking in 2026 and an indictment of the bind in which, as Donald Trump sows confusion around a potential annexation of Greenland, the world's most popular sport finds itself. But the idea is at least seeping into the mainstream and senior figures are asking what, in a worst case scenario, it would take for football to meet the moment."

"As the Guardian reported this week, an anniversary party for the Hungarian FA on Monday became the forum for unofficial discussions among national association heads about how a unified approach to the US-shaped problem might take shape. While flexibility is essential in a volatile, fast-moving situation, there is an acceptance that nobody can afford to be asleep if the time for action comes."

"While some federations are understood to have been relatively unbothered by the spectacle of Trump receiving a peace prize from the Fifa president, Gianni Infantino, in December, choosing in certain cases to find a funny side, the gravity of current events is lost on nobody. The tight bond between Infantino's leadership and the Trump administration means European football cannot look away."

European countries are contemplating a coordinated boycott of the 2026 World Cup if US actions over Greenland threaten a Uefa member. Senior national association heads have held unofficial discussions about a unified response, with emphasis on flexibility and preparedness in a fast-moving situation. European federations and Uefa are tightening unity amid caution after Trump’s comments about Greenland and suggestions of a deal. Some federations previously downplayed Trump receiving a prize from Fifa's president, but the close relationship between Fifa leadership and the Trump administration has made the situation unavoidable. The politicisation of Fifa could produce consequences, with Russia's recent exclusion providing precedent.

Read at www.theguardian.com