Latest Sports News in June 2026, Canada is set to make history as Toronto, the country’s largest city, and Vancouver, its third largest, welcome World Cup soccer action for the very first time. The 23rd edition of the tournament marks several groundbreaking moments for Canada and the sport itself. For the first time, three nations—Canada, the United States, and Mexico—will co-host the World Cup, creating a truly continental event. The competition will also expand to include 48 teams instead of the traditional 32, with the group stage reorganized into larger pools of twelve teams playing round-robin matches

In total, sixteen cities will host games: eleven across the United States, three in Mexico, and two in Canada. As one of the host countries, Canada automatically qualifies for the tournament—its third-ever appearance on soccer’s biggest stage. However, Canada’s hosting role has stirred discussion and controversy. Both Toronto and Vancouver are slated to hold just five group-stage matches each, with the potential to host additional fixtures in the new round of 32. Vancouver is also confirmed to stage one round of 16 encounter. Altogether, Canada will host only eleven matches in total, possibly extending to thirteen, a modest portion compared to the substantial financial burden shouldered by taxpayers in both provinces. It’s worth noting that Vancouver initially pulled out of the North American bid over these cost concerns before later rejoining.

Read more about Fox Sports News

Read more about Latest Sports Today

Sports news today and major international sporting events almost inevitably spark debate. Proponents emphasize potential boosts to local economies, upgrades to infrastructure, and the honor of global recognition—points often echoed by political leaders. Opponents, however, contend that the real expenses are often concealed, surpassing any promised rewards while diverting funds from essential public services. Critics further argue that these spectacles primarily benefit the wealthy, leaving ordinary taxpayers to bear the financial strain.

Vancouver, for example, has previously hosted large-scale events such as the 2010 Winter Olympics and the 2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup—both celebrated yet scrutinized for their immense price tags and uncertain long-term impacts. Governments often minimize potential financial pitfalls and overstate projected economic returns to rationalize heavy spending, leaving the true post-event outcomes ambiguous.

Amid growing public doubt, British Columbia’s newly elected provincial government announced in March 2018 that Vancouver would withdraw from the 2026 FIFA World Cup bid, intentionally missing the submission deadline. Officials cited excessive financial risk and FIFA’s lack of transparency regarding hosting terms as key reasons for the decision.

Latest sports news with major global sporting events almost always ignite controversy. Supporters highlight the potential for local economic growth, improved infrastructure, and the prestige of international recognition—arguments frequently reinforced by political figures. Critics, on the other hand, argue that the true costs are often hidden, outweighing any promised benefits and diverting resources from vital public needs. Many also contend that such events disproportionately favor the wealthy, leaving average taxpayers to shoulder the financial burden.

Vancouver, for instance, has previously welcomed major events like the 2010 Winter Olympics and the 2015 FIFA Women’s World Cup—both praised for their spectacle but questioned for their enormous expenses and uncertain lasting effects. Governments tend to downplay possible financial risks and exaggerate anticipated economic gains to justify massive investments, often leaving post-event results unclear.

In response to increasing public skepticism, British Columbia’s newly elected provincial administration announced in March 2018 that Vancouver would step back from the 2026 FIFA World Cup bid, deliberately missing the application deadline. Officials cited high financial risks and FIFA’s lack of openness about hosting conditions as the main reasons behind the withdrawal.

WVU Sports News reports that Minister Beare explained how disagreements over security expenses and the switch to a natural grass field were never completely resolved between the province, federal agencies, and stadium officials. She also noted FIFA’s “step-in” clause, which gives the organization the authority to demand late-stage adjustments to venues, parking, or security measures—even after agreements are finalized. Another major concern was the lack of protection against potential cost overruns, a safeguard that Canada Soccer had offered during Vancouver’s hosting of the 2015 Women’s World Cup. (Zussman, Richard, Global News, March 15, 2018)

At the beginning of 2018, projections suggested that Vancouver’s share of hosting expenses could reach approximately $200 million, primarily for group-stage games—an amount viewed as far too high given the numerous uncertainties. Renowned investigative reporter Andrew Jennings, known for exposing corruption within FIFA and the Olympic movement, commended British Columbia’s decision. On social media, he urged citizens to applaud their leaders for standing up to FIFA’s demands, famously stating:

“The FIFA contract is absurd. No democratic country should ever agree to it. FIFA doesn’t respect free nations—it thinks the entire planet belongs to FIFA.”

At that time, it appeared the matter was settled—Vancouver would not host World Cup matches. Public opinion largely supported that outcome. However, four years later, the same provincial government unexpectedly changed direction and re-entered the bidding process, offering little clarity or reasoning behind the reversal.

GoldenGoalPress Sports News was made without revising the outdated and questionable cost projections, and without acknowledging the restrictive contract terms imposed by FIFA — terms so demanding that numerous cities and countries have chosen to avoid bidding entirely. Now, both the City of Vancouver and the Province of British Columbia are locked into FIFA’s highly one-sided deal, which has been kept from public view — a revealing indication of just how unfavorable it is for the hosts. Since Ontario made Toronto’s contract public, it has become clear that Vancouver has also handed FIFA sweeping authority and what amounts to an open chequebook, even though the city will host only six or perhaps seven matches — none of them high-profile finals — in the expanded 48-team World Cup tournament.

Instead of standing by their initial decision, the provincial government reversed course without providing a clear explanation or supporting documentation. While Toronto remained in the bid, both Montreal and Edmonton withdrew, citing financial concerns and uncertainty. Rather than take this as validation of their earlier prudence, British Columbia’s government abruptly shifted from “no” to “yes.” Vancouver and the Province then pivoted to full promotion mode, touting ambitious predictions of massive economic benefits.

Fox Sports News reports that major global sporting spectacles such as the FIFA World Cup 2026 have the unique ability to inspire greater participation in sports, strengthen community pride, and highlight the remarkable qualities of British Columbia. Tourism, Arts, Culture and Sport Minister Lana Popham expressed enthusiasm about hosting the event, saying the province looks forward to welcoming hundreds of thousands of visitors to Vancouver and across B.C. for this once-in-a-lifetime celebration — one expected to boost tourism, stimulate the economy, and deliver lasting benefits for residents.

Back in March 2022, provincial estimates placed the total cost of hosting Vancouver’s World Cup matches between $230 million and $260 million, reflecting the “obligations of a FIFA World Cup Host City.”

Sports news football for the City agreed to fund half of the total event costs, planning to generate its portion through a 2.5% levy on short-term accommodations over the next ten years. Officials estimated around 269,000 spectators would attend, with roughly half expected to travel from beyond North America (according to a B.C. Government news release) — a bold projection for a ten-day tournament. Rather than addressing potential financial risks, the Province broadened its message, presenting the World Cup as a platform for advancing Indigenous reconciliation and driving long-term economic growth, echoing the narrative used during the 2010 Winter Olympics. However, based on previous experiences, many residents were skeptical that these promised gains would ever be realized. Critics questioned why funding was suddenly available for a few football matches while local parks, cultural initiatives, and community services continued to face neglect and budget shortfalls.

Sky Sports News reports that it has become clear politicians and advisors neither fully grasped nor properly recalculated the financial commitments outlined in the FIFA Host City agreement. In contrast to Toronto, Vancouver chose not to make its contract public. Given that the terms are virtually the same, this secrecy speaks volumes. In effect, those in charge either lacked the expertise to negotiate effectively or simply yielded to FIFA’s conditions. For years, FIFA has used its global influence to impose terms on eager host nations. However, in recent times, more countries have withdrawn, citing excessive costs, limited long-term benefits, and ongoing corruption concerns. This shift helps explain why only two bids were submitted for the 2026 World Cup — Morocco and the joint North American proposal. For most fans, watching from their living rooms is more than enough — without footing the bill for billions in hosting expenses.

Byu Sports News reports that Canada will continue its role as co-host in June 2026. Toronto and Vancouver are each slated to host five group-stage games. In Vancouver, matches are scheduled from June 13–26, with at least one round-of-16 game already confirmed.

Philly Sports News has listed 49 possible training camp locations across North America for the 2026 World Cup, one more than the total number of participating teams. Additional sites will be announced this spring, with the final roster expected in the fall, aiming for roughly 68 locations in total.

At present, 32 of these options are situated in cities that won’t be hosting tournament matches. Of the 11 U.S. host cities, six—New York/New Jersey, Philadelphia, Houston, Dallas, Atlanta, and Kansas City—also appear on the base camp list. Dallas tops the chart with five potential camps, while Atlanta and Kansas City each have two. The New York/New Jersey site is located in Atlantic City, New Jersey.

Following the Final Draw, teams will choose their base camps according to FIFA world rankings. FIFA’s online catalog features a map displaying each camp’s distance from official host cities.

Miami Host Committee Co-Chair Rodney Barreto recently told the Miami Herald, “We’re a bit frustrated with FIFA because they haven’t given us the green light yet; they’ve essentially restricted what we can present to sponsors.”