Critics of the push to keep the 2030 World Cup final in Europe argue that it ignores the evolving landscape of global football and the significant investments being made by emerging host nations. By focusing exclusively on established venues like the Bernabéu, football authorities risk sidelining the transformative potential of the 2030 tournament in Africa. Morocco’s investment in the Grand Stade Hassan II is not merely a construction project; it is a statement of intent to modernize the sport’s reach and provide a new, state-of-the-art stage for the world’s biggest game.
Skeptics of the 'traditionalist' approach point out that the current lobbying efforts by Spanish officials and club presidents may be driven more by political influence than by the objective needs of the tournament. They warn that if FIFA prioritizes existing European power structures, it could undermine the spirit of a truly global, inclusive World Cup. The sheer scale of the Casablanca stadium—designed to exceed the capacity of any Spanish venue—offers a unique opportunity to set a new benchmark for attendance and hospitality in the modern era. For many, the decision should be based on which venue provides the most innovative and expansive experience, rather than which city has the longest history of hosting.
Furthermore, there is a concern that the intense focus on the final venue is distracting from the broader governance issues currently facing FIFA. By allowing the selection process to become a tug-of-war between powerful stakeholders, the governing body risks appearing beholden to specific interests rather than the global football community. Critics argue that a fair and transparent decision-making process is essential to maintain the integrity of the tournament and ensure that the 2030 World Cup serves as a bridge between continents, rather than a reinforcement of old hierarchies.