Andrew Giuliani’s – Andrew Giuliani, executive director of the White House’s World Cup task force, has said the United States might bid to host the 2038 World Cup—potentially expanded to 64 teams. For some supporters, the idea lands badly after what they describe as unpleasant pr
Two weeks into a World Cup that has already felt like a parade of new discoveries. the mood still swings between excitement and exasperation—between the human warmth on show in the United States and the paperwork. politics and distance that make the tournament’s machinery feel bloated and distant from fans’ lives.
That tension flared again with a bombastic pledge from Andrew Giuliani. executive director of the White House’s World Cup task force. Giuliani declared the United States might bid for the 2038 World Cup. a tournament that “could be expanded to 64 teams. ” and the idea has left the watching world uneasy—especially among supporters who want the spotlight to move on rather than circle back.
Giuliani sounded proud of the prospect. “There’s no better country that’s positioned to host a World Cup than the United States. ” he said. while pointing to what he framed as the advantages of being ready. “Stadiums had already been built.” He added that the cost was “a couple of billion” as opposed to what he described as tens and tens of billions in other host nations. and he claimed the U.S. government had the right approach. saying. “The USA’s faculty to be the best was unquestionable.” He even tied the argument to social media. claiming. “And I think we’re seeing that on social media.”.
Yet the pushback is immediate and emotional. The tournament may be about sport, but fans are rarely able to switch off the wider context. Before the games even began. the football story didn’t erase the uncomfortable details for everyone: members of Iran’s backroom staff were denied entry visas for the United States. The same squad was then forced to switch its base from Arizona to Tijuana in Mexico. Somali referee Omar Abdulkadir Artan was also denied access.
For those already sensitive to the way immigration and politics hover over international football, Giuliani’s tone has been jarring. The sense among many supporters is not simply that the U.S. might host again. but that the concept of the future tournament—already shaped by an expanded format and FIFA’s appetite—could slide toward the familiar instead of opening doors elsewhere.
The writer behind this reaction argues that, even if a U.S. bid is feasible, it would be a missed chance to give other nations their turn. The point is built around a list of countries that. in his view. deserve the spotlight more: England. Colombia. Italy. Turkey. Australia and India. England, he notes, would be 72 years removed from its last men’s World Cup by 2038, making a third U.S. hosting stretch—“a gross iniquity,” in his words—hard to accept.
Supporters also point to the way the current tournament has been discussed: the piece recalls “deeply despised hydration breaks” and the “inordinate distances” that come with World Cups. It also references fans in nations such as Scotland being “stuck in limbo” because of the “bloated format. ” and the wider disappointment that sometimes follows when a tournament expands faster than the public can understand.
Still, the warm side of the U.S. experience is acknowledged. Many American people have told him they are grateful for the hospitality because. as they put it. Donald Trump has made them and their homeland a source of suspicion “the world over.” That warmth. the piece suggests. is real—and it’s what makes the Giuliani pledge feel more troubling. not less.
The heart of the unease is the idea of repetition. The writer contrasts the U.S. bid talk with a different kind of World Cup image—one he says can build community through scale. He points to Qatar 2022 and recalls the criticism around it. including the “widows of the Godforsaken Asian immigrant workers who died building stadiums” who “will never be compensated. ” while also insisting that the tournament’s stadiums sitting within a “33-mile radius of Doha” created a sense of closeness that felt “beautiful.” In his view. the U.S. pitch for another far-reaching staging would bring back the one-nation challenge. especially after FIFA has already unleashed a 48-team tournament. which he says has brought teams “whose technical calibre simply didn’t belong in a World Cup.”.
By 2038, with FIFA’s expansion plans still in motion and the prospect of the U.S. returning to host again growing louder, the question is no longer just where football will be played. It’s what kinds of stories the tournament will choose to tell—about who gets the spotlight. how often. and what gets pushed into the background when a bid becomes a headline.
World Cup 2038 Andrew Giuliani White House World Cup task force FIFA Gianni Infantino United States bid visa denials Omar Abdulkadir Artan Iran backroom staff expanded World Cup format