How cyber criminals are taking advantage of the FIFA World Cup

Copyright AP Photo/Tony Gutierrez

By Anna Desmarais

Published on 09/06/2026 - EURONEWS

From fake websites to malicious calendar invitations, here is how cyber attackers have already been taking advantage of the FIFA World Cup hype.

While football fans around the world wait with bated breath for the FIFA World Cup to start, cyber criminals are already hard at work online.

The tournament, heralded by the organisers as the biggest event of its kind ever, will see 104 teams go head-to-head in 16 North American cities across Canada, the United States and Mexico when the games begin later this week.

Cybercriminals have already created thousands of World Cup-related campaigns and, heading into the tournament, the Canadian and American governments have issued warnings for spectators to keep a close eye out for scams.

Here is what campaigns have already taken place online and what to expect as we wait for the kick-off.

Thousands of fake FIFA websites

One of the most popular schemes for cybercriminals is the fake FIFA website or merchandise store, according to cybersecurity firms Fortinet and Check Point.

In a recent report, Fortinet identified over 13,000 World Cup-themed websites registered between January and May. Approximately 8% of these websites were classified as malicious or suspicious based on scam activity and patterns on the website, the analysis found.

Most of the websites they identified were used to attract users who are looking for tournament information and services by using World Cup-related keywords and abusing the FIFA branding, Fortinet said.

The goal of these sites is to “steal sensitive information such as payment card details, personal identification data, and login credentials” by tricking World Cup hopefuls into buying fake tickets, Fortinet said.

Related

• Watch: Forget the football—the money game behind the 2026 World Cup

Often called “card not present,” fraud, these sites have been in place at other major events, such as the 2022 World Cup and the 2024 Paris Olympics, and look to exploit “urgency and scarcity to pressure rapid purchasing decisions,” according to Check Point.

Fortinet observed some scammers posting fake World Cup travel packages, including tickets, hotel and transportation on messaging app Telegram “while creating a strong sense of urgency,” the report said.

The Telegram posts redirect potential buyers to a fake ticketing website hosting a sham checkout page, where they are prompted to enter their personal information. After putting in their payment information, the victim receives a fake invoice.

Other websites also replicate sports-related gambling sites that face increased demand during large events such as the World Cup, the report said. Cyber criminals often distribute “fake or trojanized betting applications disguised as legitimate software,” to trick users into placing bets on their platforms.

Fake jobs, profiles and streaming services on social media

Cybercriminals are not just restricted to traditional websites; they also created 1,700 fake social media profiles on Facebook and Instagram, the report said.

“The widespread presence of unofficial accounts using FIFA branding increases the risk of brand abuse, misinformation, fraudulent promotions, phishing attempts, and other social engineering activities targeting football fans ahead of the FIFA World Cup 2026,” the report said.

On the LinkedIn job site, scammers have been circulating fake job advertisements to trick users into thinking they were applying for short-term roles in event staffing, hospitality, logistics and media support.

Hackers often impersonate real recruitment agents for their scams, directing prospective job applicants to fake calendar schedules that have a phishing site embedded to steal their personal information.

Related

• 2026 World Cup: five key facts about FIFA's biggest ever tournament

Social media platforms such as Facebook, X and Telegram have also distributed fake links to streaming platforms that promise to livestream a specific game with a group of fans.​

The links would often appear a few minutes before a match begins, often within closed groups or channels, and users are pressured into quickly registering their information or installing a fake “player” before the stream starts.

However, in many of the social media cases, Fortinet noted that fans have been quick to spot fakes, with many taking to Reddit to ask other fans to confirm whether they have been the victim of a scam.

Euronews Next contacted these platforms to see whether they have increased any content moderation or scam detection ahead of the World Cup, but did not receive an immediate reply.

​How to protect yourself

Consider verifying the domain name of a website or email address related to the World Cup before deciding to click on it, Check Point said in a list of recommendations.

Only book through On Location, FIFA’s hospitality partner, for hospitality packages or directly with the hotel that you want to stay at, the cybersecurity firm said.

Related

• Thousands join record-breaking human wave attempt in Mexico City ahead of World Cup

If booking online, use a credit card instead of a debit card to buy something tournament-related due to stronger protections against scammers, it suggested.

If a fan sees something suspicious, Check Point suggests slowing down before acting, because buying into urgency can make it easier to fall for a scam.

For fans going to the World Cup, Check Point recommends running phone and app updates before arrival at the stadium so hackers cannot access devices that have security flaws.

Why soccer fandom in Latin America feels almost sacred

MEXICO CITY (AP) — Among fans passion is nurtured through a sense of community. The singing of anthems, tears shed after victories or defeats, and the embrace of strangers inside a stadium are experiences that can mirror forms of collective devotion.

Maria Teresa Hernandez, ElÉonore Hughes and Nayara Batschke
June 4, 2026 

AP


MEXICO CITY (AP) — The chain that hung from Santiago García’s neck carried no crosses or saint medals, yet it felt sacred nonetheless.

When García’s grandmother fell sick years ago and he visited her in intensive care, the Argentine soccer fan took off his beloved Boca Juniors necklace and placed it around her neck.

“Boca will save you,” García murmured to his grandmother. “And it did. So now it’s hers.”



García’s faith in his club mirrors that of millions across Latin America as the region prepares for the 2026 World Cup. From Argentina to Mexico, devotion to the game often spills into everyday life, inspiring rituals and beliefs tied to the sport.

“There has been an emotional connection between the public and their soccer teams for a long time,” said Mexican analyst Erick Fernández. “It fosters identity and bonds that make us feel part of a sporting process that represents us.”

In Argentina, the home country of Lionel Messi, sports passion is often inherited within families and loyalty to clubs strengthens over time. Pope Francis himself — born in Argentina and lifelong supporter of club San Lorenzo — said he agreed with those describing soccer as the world’s most beautiful game.

García’s love for Boca Juniors came from his father. He said his mother used to support another team, but after the couple met, she became a Boca fan too.

“You usually support your mother’s or father’s club,” García said. “Soccer is the backbone of it all, but you develop a sense of belonging to a team and carry it with you everywhere.”

He may have let go of his Boca necklace and the energy he believed it carried, but the club’s imprint was already etched into his skin.



At age 17, García tattooed a phrase from the club’s anthem on his torso. Fourteen years later, those words remain as meaningful as they were when the ink was fresh.

“It belongs to a song that is like a chant of war for us,” he said. “It’s like saying: ‘No matter the storm, no matter what happens, we will always be there for you.’”

The power of belonging

Pope Francis once told a crowd that soccer is a team sport whose beauty comes from its collective spirit.

Among fans, too, passion is nurtured through a sense of community. The singing of anthems, tears shed after victories or defeats, and the embrace of strangers inside a stadium are experiences that can mirror forms of collective devotion.

“Each person can support a team, but the sense of togetherness that generates ‘communitas’ — a word associated with religion — is only possible when people gather,” said Argentine anthropologist Eloísa Martín.

Both negative and positive reactions can emerge from that sense of collective identity. A fan who feels a member of his sporting community has been attacked by a rival may react violently in ways he otherwise never would. But the same dynamic can strengthen solidarity, leading fans to help strangers because they support the same club.



“Soccer creates a community even for those who lack one,” Martín said.

On a recent night, among a sea of fans heading towards Maracanã stadium in Rio de Janeiro was Adilvania Santos. Dressed in the maroon and green colors of Fluminense, the 27-year-old said that supporting the club had helped her through a difficult time in her life.

“I get emotional talking about Fluminense,” said Santos, who described the passion for her club as the most important aspect of her life, apart from her family. “Some people come together to go to church. For us, accompanying Fluminense is also sacred.”

Santos tries to attend every game despite living nearly 100 kilometers (about 60 miles) from Rio. When she follows matches from home, she stays alone in her bedroom to avoid interruptions from family members who may not support her team.

“Soccer deeply moves Brazilians because it creates a sense of belonging, identity and hope,” said Jeferson Mengali, a Catholic priest in the Bragança Paulista diocese and a lifelong fan of Corinthians. “People suffer, work hard and face difficulties, and soccer becomes a space for collective joy.”

Rituals for victory

Mengali supported Corinthians as a chaplain for years. He celebrated Masses with the team and was present during training sessions and matches.

“I have always liked praying before important games,” he said. “Asking more for serenity than victory.”



While not all soccer fans pray, many cling to rituals they believe can influence the outcome of a game. In Argentina these practices are known as “cábalas.” According to Martín, they became widespread during the 1990s.

Cábalas vary widely. Fans may drink from the same cup, sit in the exact same spot or wear the same underwear during every match. Others insist on watching games with certain people, while some avoid watching altogether after concluding they bring bad luck to their team.

Rituals are repeated if the team wins and abandoned if it loses. For some supporters, avoiding a match can even feel like a sacrifice made in hopes of securing victory.

At García’s home, his father sits in a specific chair whenever Boca is playing well. If the rival team scores, he changes seats. His mother cleans the house instead of watching the game, stopping every so often to ask about the score.

García’s current cábala includes wearing the same jersey throughout the season and carrying a small image of Diego Maradona everywhere he goes.

“After he died, he was rapidly sanctified by the people,” García said. “He became a figure bigger than sports.”



NEW: Bring more puzzles and play to your week with RNS Games

Saints of the stadium

Argentines rarely call him Maradona. He’s simply “El Diego,” as one would refer to a family member or an old friend from the neighborhood.

“Maradona is the player, while ‘El Diego’ is the one people turn to like a family member when they need help,” Martín said. “Sacredness only works when there’s a community behind it.”

Legends like “El Diego” or Brazil’s “The King” Pelé are recognized across the world. But other soccer fans in Latin America revere personal idols of their own.

In Chile, Héctor Hermosilla keeps a black-and-white portrait of Colo Colo club founder David Arellano at his home.

“He founded Colo Colo in 1925 and before every match I always say goodbye to him and ask him to watch over us,” Hermosilla said.

He still remembers attending his first match in 1986 and falling under the spell of the atmosphere inside the arena. From then on, he faithfully began to follow his team, traveling from Chile’s far north to Puerto Montt, considered the gateway to Patagonia.



To finance his trips, he and his wife typed out the iconic anthems of Colo Colo and sold photocopies to fans, earning him the nickname “Nano Fotocopia.”

“There were around 20 songs and I would make photocopies and sell them for 100 pesos,” he said.

Typewriters and photocopies became obsolete over time. Hermosilla now sells necklaces, bracelets and other accessories to finance the trips he now does with his wife and teenage son.

When in Chile, Hermosilla still attends matches every Sunday and performs a ritual he has followed since the 1980s. Beneath Arellano’s portrait, he asks for the club founder’s blessing, packs his products for sale and heads to a roast chicken restaurant where fans gather.

“He is like our God,” Hermosilla said. “He is the one who guides us.”

___

Batschke reported from Santiago, Chile, and Hughes from Rio de Janeiro.

___

Associated Press religion coverage receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content.

The UK media’s shocking role in Britain’s anti-trans movement

Through sustained media attention, political opportunism and well-funded campaigning networks, trans people have been elevated from a small minority seeking equal treatment into a symbolic battleground in Britain's culture wars.

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead 

Left Foot Forward

 Jun 6, 2026 

“I was just quietly getting on with my life and then the roof fell in. I just want to get back to how things were,” remarked a trans person following the Supreme Court case ruling in April 2025, that the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex.

The comment captures the reality many transgender people in Britain now face. For years, trans people lived largely outside the spotlight, navigating ordinary lives while seeking acceptance, healthcare and legal recognition. Today, however, they find themselves at the centre of one of the most fiercely contested political and cultural battles in the country.

Trans people represent a tiny fraction of the UK population, yet they occupy a remarkable amount of media and political attention. More often than not, that attention is not generated by trans people themselves, but by politicians, campaign groups and commentators, who frame transgender lives as a problem to be solved, sometimes even as some kind of threat to be dealt with.

A major new report from Amnesty International UK suggests this is no accident.

The report the media barely noticed

On 21 May, Amnesty International UK published Like a Snowball:The Growth and Impact of the Gender Critical Movement in the UK, an extensive analysis of the rise of anti-trans campaigning and its influence on public discussion.

The research found that between January 2020 and April 2025, five of Britain’s largest newspapers, the Times, Sunday Times, Telegraph, Guardian and the Sun, published approximately 17,000 articles on trans-related issues.
That amounts to an average of 264 articles every month, or roughly nine every day.

The analysis showed that trans people themselves were largely absent from this coverage. Instead, politicians, commentators and anti-trans campaigners dominated the conversation, and, when trans people did appear, it was mostly as criminals or murder victims.

The Times and Sunday Times produced the highest volume of coverage, averaging more than 83 articles per month. While the Sun, which published the least, averaged 38 articles monthly.

This level of attention is extraordinary when viewed against the size of the population being discussed. According to the 2021 Census, approximately 262,000 people in England and Wales identified as transgender or had a gender identity different from their sex registered at birth, around 0.5% of the population.

Yet you’d struggle to find another issue affecting such a small minority that receives anything like comparable media attention.

A debate the public isn’t asking for

The intensity of coverage is also grossly disproportionate when you consider public priorities.

Ahead of the 2024 general election, issues relating to trans rights, gender identity and sex didn’t feature among voters’ top 16 concerns.

Nevertheless, media analysis found that questions of sex, gender and sexuality dominated reporting on so-called “culture war” topics in the weeks before the election.

So, while the public was primarily concerned with paying bills and accessing public services, much of the media and political class remained fixated on trans people.

As Amnesty’s gender justice programme director, Chiara Capraro, notes:

“There is nothing balanced about the way trans people’s lives are reported. Anti-trans narratives dominate coverage and are often presented as fact, while trans people themselves are pushed to the margins or erased entirely.”
Capraro argues that this isn’t an organic development but the product of coordinated efforts to reshape public opinion and influence policy.

“The consequences are real, affecting trans people’s equality, safety and wellbeing across the UK.

“Trans people have become a lightning rod in wider culture wars, with harmful narratives amplified across powerful platforms, shaping public perceptions.”

How Britain’s anti-trans media campaign took shape

Amnesty argues that while transphobia predated today’s ‘gender critical’ (GC) movement, the movement itself can be traced back to 2017-2018, during public consultations by the Scottish and Westminster governments on reforming the Gender Recognition Act 2004 (GRA).

Shortly before the Westminster consultation closed, the GC group Fair Play for Women took out a full-page advert in the Metro urging readers to oppose the reforms and providing a pre-filled consultation response. According to the government’s own analysis, more than 18,000 submissions used this template, accounting for around 18% of all responses.

Earlier research by trans rights activist MimmyMum also identifies 2017 as a turning point in British media coverage of transgender issues. Anti-trans reporting accelerated during debates over GRA reform, with particular focus on the role of the Times, especially through opinion columns by Janice Turner and reporting by Andrew Gilligan.

The pattern quickly spread across much of the national press, including the Telegraph and Daily Mail. Stories questioning trans rights increasingly became a reliable source of engagement, clicks and controversy. Even the traditionally liberal Guardian and Observer adopted a more trans-hostile tone, sparking internal staff disputes and contributing to the resignation of columnist Suzanne Moore in 2020 after she defended the view that biological sex is real and that stating so is not transphobic.

MimmyMum further argues that the BBC followed a similar path, claiming that BBC News coverage was influenced by senior gender-critical figures within the corporation.

What began as a niche policy debate soon became a recurring media obsession, creating the impression of a major national crisis despite the relatively small number of people directly affected.

Critics of this shift argue that it was never simply a spontaneous public debate. Trade unions themselves have long warned that transgender rights were being weaponised for political purposes. In 2020, the TUC Congress passed a motion stating that “a majority Conservative government is using trans rights as a wedge issue to divide working class people,” and “myths and tropes about trans and non-binary people are regularly being promoted in the Murdoch papers.”

Inevitably too, the issues became caught up in the deep state/free speech narratives, most famously when Father Ted’s co-creator Graham Linehan was arrested on suspicion of inciting violence against transgender people on social media. Totally predictably, Nigel Farage and Elon Musk piled in, seeing the arrest as yet more evidence of denying people the right to say whatever they liked. Eventually the police apologised to Linehan on the grounds of insufficient evidence of the incitement to violence charge.

The organisations behind the movement

Amnesty’s report also places the rise of anti-trans activism within a broader network of organisations campaigning against abortion rights, LGBTQ+ equality and gender equality.

Previous Amnesty research identified 65 organisations operating in this space, three-quarters of which are registered charities. Together, 32 of these organisations spent more than £106 million between 2019 and 2023.

Amnesty’s mapping found that out of more than 50 organisations campaigning to restrict the rights of trans people, only three existed prior to 2017, confirming the rapid growth of the movement in recent years.

The report also highlights the increasing influence of international networks, particularly those linked to the United States.

Among them is the UK branch of Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF), who’s spending rose by 258% between 2019 and 2024.

ADF is best known for its role in legal campaigns that helped overturn Roe v. Wade in the United States and has supported efforts to restrict LGBTQ+ rights around the world.

Amnesty notes that the largest category of ‘gender critical’ organisations consists of employee networks across sectors including the civil service, education, healthcare and retail. Many of these groups are affiliated with the Sex Equality and Equity Network (SEEN), which states that it exists to support staff with gender-critical views and promote “sex equality” based on the belief that biological sex should not be conflated with gender identity.

Rather than emerging organically, opposition to trans rights was built through increasingly organised networks backed by substantial financial resources and political influence.

Real-life consequences

As anti-trans sentiment has intensified in Britain’s media, transphobic hate crime has continued to rise.

Home Office statistics show a marked rise in recorded transgender hate crimes after 2017, with the largest jump occurring between 2021 and 2022, when these crimes rose by 56% in a single year.

The official Home Office report explicitly states:

“Transgender hate crimes had been rising before the fall seen in the last year, and now account for 3% of all hate crimes recorded, up from 1% a decade ago (year ending March 2014).”

The most high-profile case was the murder of 16-year-old transgender girl Brianna Ghey in February 2023. Although her killing was not initially treated as a hate crime, evidence suggested transphobia played a role in motivating her attackers.

Journalist and legal researcher Jess O’Thomson argues that Britain’s media landscape has helped fuel a hostile environment for trans people.

“The media over here is also incredibly transphobic,” she said. “There’s a reason we’re referred to as TERF Island, and even the left-wing press has massive problems when it comes to trans inclusion.”

On the reporting of Brianna Grey, O’Thomson said she was struck by the gap between what emerged in court and how the case was covered.

“During the trial, sitting there in court and then reading the reporting of the people next to me, I felt like I was being gaslit. Because I was in court hearing this incredibly transphobic material, with none of it being reported on as transphobia during the trial, or even after the verdict.

She argues that the press “deliberately obscured” the role of transphobia in this case, masking the wider impact of anti-trans prejudice in British society.

The report the media barely mentioned

And on media downplaying, what I noticed when writing this week’s RWW, is how little attention Amnesty UK’s report received from the British media. A study examining the role of media in amplifying anti-trans narratives was itself largely ignored by the very institutions it scrutinised.

One of the few outlets to cover the report was UnHerd, through an article by freelance journalist Janet Murray. Murray is well known for her gender-critical views, having penned a piece in the Telegraph in April, headlined ‘Even mentioning JK Rowling’s name gets you cancelled by the pro-trans mob.’

Murray argues that Amnesty’s findings represent a decline in the organisation’s credibility, suggesting that the report resembled “a dossier on a dangerous extremist network” rather than an investigation into a movement campaigning against trans rights.

She criticised Amnesty’s conclusion that journalists should platform more trans voices, produce more positive stories about trans people and avoid sensationalist “gotcha” questions. For Murray, this was evidence of activism masquerading as human rights research.

Yet this response arguably illustrates Amnesty’s concerns rather than refuting them.

When weighed against the discrimination, harassment, hate crimes and violence experienced by many trans people, claims that gender-critical campaigners have suffered reputational damage for expressing their views are surely comparatively minor.

A minority turned into a scapegoat

Regardless of where individuals stand on the legal questions involved, one fact remains difficult to ignore: trans people have become a lightning rod for wider cultural anxieties.

A population representing less than one per cent of society has been transformed into a national obsession.

Through sustained media attention, political opportunism and well-funded campaigning networks, trans people have been elevated from a small minority seeking equal treatment into a symbolic battleground in Britain’s culture wars.

The transgender person who said they wanted life to return to normal was expressing a sentiment that many would recognise. Most people don’t want to be at the centre of a national debate. They simply want to live their lives. The tragedy is that much of Britain’s media seems unwilling to let them.

Woke-bashing of the week: GB News can’t decide whether the NFL supports Pride Month, but still declares a Trump triumph

Is the NFL actually distancing itself from Pride Month, or is GB News selectively presenting evidence to fit a preferred political narrative?

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead ·

Right-Wing Watch

Left Foot Forward

 Jun 6, 2026 

Pride Month is underway, but rather than recognising the annual global observance celebrating LGBTQ+ history, visibility and the ongoing struggle for equality, GB Newschose to celebrate the National Football League’s (NFL) apparent decision to distance itself from the event.

In a triumphant report, the broadcaster heralded what it described as the “latest corporate heel-turn on woke culture in America,” pointing to how the NFL’s official X and Instagram accounts, which collectively reach almost 70 million followers, did not publish dedicated Pride Month messages on June 1.

The article gloats that how, in previous years, the league had posted messages such as “Football is for everyone” and wished followers a “Happy Pride,” and how this year, nine of the NFL’s 32 teams also refrained from making Pride-related posts on the opening day of the month.

Yet moments later, the right-wing outlet acknowledges that the NFL’s official X account actively reposted Pride Month messages from several franchises, including the New York Giants, Seattle Seahawks, Los Angeles Chargers, San Francisco 49ers, Buffalo Bills, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Houston Texans and Carolina Panthers.

So, is the NFL actually distancing itself from Pride Month, or is GB News selectively presenting evidence to fit a preferred political narrative?

The article goes on to note that the NFL still maintains a Pride section on its official website, though it emphasises that the page appears not to have been updated for several years.

The channel is also forced to concede that other major American sports organisations have continued to mark Pride Month publicly. Major League Baseball, the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League all issued Pride-related messages on social media.

But even that is not where the story ends, as the report turns its attention to Donald Trump.

Readers are reminded that Trump has repeatedly called on sports teams to reverse changes made during the social and political upheavals of 2020, including urging the NFL’s Washington Commanders to restore their former name, the Redskins.

The franchise abandoned the name during the Black Lives Matter protests, initially rebranding as the Washington Football Team before adopting the Commanders identity in 2022.

The article notes Trump’s threat to block the team’s proposed stadium deal unless it reverted to its former name. What it doesn’t dwell on is the fact that the stadium agreement ultimately proceeded without any name change.

Nevertheless, Trump emerges as the unmistakable protagonist of the piece. The headline itself leaves little doubt about how readers are expected to interpret events: “NFL teams shun Pride Month as tide turns on woke under Donald Trump.”

Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is author of Right-Wing Watch

UK

“Have you noticed how we only win the World Cup under a Labour government?”

\ \

JUNE 5, 2026

Politicians seldom get it right when they talk about football, argues Mark Perryman.

In March 1966 Harold Wilson’s Labour Party won a landslide victory and just four months later Harold was there to celebrate when England for the first, and to date last, time lifted the World Cup at Wembley. 

Never mind the (disgraced) Peter Mandelson, England’s victory spurred Harold to the greatest piece of Labour spin-doctoring ever. Of course, Harold had been at the Final; infamously Harold sent one of his advisers to the BBC matchday studio to suggest he join commentator Kenneth Wolstenholme for some half-time punditry – an invitation that was promptly turned down. Perhaps they lacked the silky charm of (disgraced)  Peter Mandelson?!

Four years later, most unwisely Labour risked their 1970 General Election chances by choosing a date slap-bang in the middle of England’s defence of their World Cup at Mexico 1970.  The quarter-final defeat to West Germany  was widely blamed for Labour’s defeat just four days later.

Yes, really. Wilson’s Minister of Sport, and former League referee, Denis Howell, was better-placed than most to justify the impact: “The moment goalkeeper Bonetti made his third and final hash of it on the Sunday, everything simultaneously began to go wrong for Labour for the following Thursday.”

Labour and football, eh? Be careful what you wish for. Still at least 1970 General Election victor Ted Heath and his sundry Tory Prime Minister successors have proved incapable of robbing Harold’s sound-bite of it’s enduring truth.

But any kind of relationship between politics and international football in the particular context of England has a broader purpose than simply, win lose or draw supposedly being dependent on the party in government at the time. 

There is one crucial word that Harold gets spectacularly wrong: ‘we’. Great Britain is unique in international football, represented by four – and for the purposes of football at least – independent nations: England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.  It doesn’t require either pedantry or nationalism to recognise this. It’s a fact perhaps lost on Harold, or Keir, who every time a summer football tournament comes around will promptly, and very publicly, choose an England shirt for his go-to leisure wear. This tells us, or at least it should, everything we need to know about Labour Unionism.

Gordon Brown might have thought he was being helpful travelling out to  support England at World Cup 2006 as the British Prime Minister. Precious few England fans were won over while in his native Scotland it went down like a lead proverbial. Of course, not all Scotland fans are nationalists. But when in 1992 Jim Sillars lost his Govan seat that he’d won in an infamous 1988 SNP by-election defeat of Labour and angrily described the Tartan Army as “90-minute nationalists,” it was a very different era to now. The SNP are no longer a minor party, but, via the Scottish Parliament, a governing party with a formidable number of MPs at Westminster. If Harold could have got away with ‘we’ in 1966, in Scotland, Wales and the North of Ireland, he certainly couldn’t today; yet Keir wears his `England shirt regardless.

Such confusion is both muti-faceted and deep-rooted in Englishness. World Cup Quiz question: which is the only team at this summer’s tournament to line up before kick-off without a National Anthem of their own for them and their fans to belt out? England! God Save the King is the National Anthem of the United Kingdom, not England and just try asking the Scotland team to dop Flower of Scotland to join in too!

This isn’t pedantry, it gets to the core of Englishness, a contradictory mix of nationalism and unionism. The most vivid example of this is the spate of hanging flags, Union Jacks and St George Crosses, from lamp posts in a movement to ‘Unite the Kingdom’. Much of this is wrapped up in a version of English patriotism which does little to distinguish itself from bad old-fashioned racism.

Contrast this to what Harold’s ‘we’ has become. The Wembley 1966 final was full of Union Jacks, the St George scarcely present. The tournament mascot  ‘World Cup Willy’ wore a Union Jack. Yes, the only time England has not only won, but hosted too a World Cup and the FA got our flag wrong! 

Few England fans this summer will make this mistake: the St George Cross is Universal, home and away. And in sheer numbers it will absolutely dwarf those of the lamp post hangers too.  And the purpose dwarves them too. A St George Cross celebrating a multicultural team managed by a German on its own doesn’t make for an anti-racist, Europeanised nation, but given the popular-political will is a very welcome first step in both directions.

In July 2024 Keir Starmer’s Labour Party won a landslide victory and just two years later Keir was there to celebrate when England for the second time lifted the World Cup at the New York New Jersey stadium. 

Well, that’s one Labour pledge all of England can get behind. 

Mark Perryman is the co-founder of the self-styled ‘ sporting outfitters of intellectual distinction’ aka Philosophy Football.

Special Offer The Philosophy Football Harold Wilson T-shirt is available to Labour Hub readers at 25% off and postage free. Quote coupon code LHWC26 at checkout. From here. 

Borders, Ballgames and Global Players

Daniel Warner

 June 5, 2026

FacebookTwitterRedditBlueskyEmail

Victor Wembenyama at 2025 NBA Cup. Photograph Source: Daiei Onoguchi – CC BY 4.0

The upcoming June 14 vote on limiting Switzerland’s population to 10 million is a daily reminder here in Geneva that nativist populism remains a powerful political force. In France, Marine Le Pen continues to build support on anti-immigration politics. Nigel Farage pushes similar anxieties in Britain. The AfD does the same in Germany. Donald Trump’s version is familiar: build walls, tighten borders, send ICE into cities. Across much of the West, hostility toward foreigners has become ordinary politics.

Which is why the recent announcement of the National Basketball Association’s All-NBA First Team was so striking. At the very moment politics is warning against outsiders, American sports is celebrating them. Four of the five players selected to the NBA’s top team were born outside the United States. The city game has gone global. (The phrase city game for basketball was popularized in Pete Axthelm’s The City Game, his classic account of New York basketball in the late 1960s.)

Chosen by a panel of 100 sportswriters and broadcasters covering the league, the All-NBA First Team included: Shai Gilgeous-Alexander of the Oklahoma City Thunder, from Canada; Nikola Jokić of the Denver Nuggets, from Serbia; Victor Wembanyama of the San Antonio Spurs, from France; Luka Dončić of the Los Angeles Lakers, from Slovenia. Only Cade Cunningham of the Detroit Pistons was American. Four of the league’s five best players were born abroad, representing four countries and starring in four different American cities.

That is not symbolic. It reflects a broader reality. As of the 2025–26 season, 135 NBA players were born outside the United States, the highest number in league history. They come from 43 countries across six continents. Roughly one in four players in the NBA is now international.

Now, for those who are not basketball fans, allow me to briefly explain the importance of basketball in the United States. It is one of America’s defining sports: invented in Springfield, Massachusetts, and perfected on playground courts like Rucker Park in Harlem. As Vinson Cunningham observed, “Basketball is one of New York’s great public spectacles: you can’t walk far without passing a hoop.” It is American in origin and mythology, embedded in the streets of New York, Detroit, Chicago, and Los Angeles. Yet the league’s brightest stars increasingly arrive with accents, translators, and passports from elsewhere.

My beloved New York Knicks reflect the same global pattern: OG Anunoby was born in London, Pacôme Dadiet in France, Ariel Hukporti in Germany, and Karl-Anthony Towns represents the Dominican Republic in international competition.

Although New York’s Madison Square Garden (MSG) is considered the sport’s Mecca, the sport reaches far beyond cities. Even in Midwestern rural states like Indiana, basketball courts are woven into everyday life in countless driveways. “Mr. Indiana Basketball” is a major statewide honor—closer to a civic title than a routine sports award. (For anyone curious about Indiana basketball culture, Gene Hackman’s Hoosiers remains the reference point.)

Basketball is not a simple sports niche—it is a major entertainment industry. The NBA Finals regularly draw between 10 and 20 million U.S. viewers per game. The NBA generates billions in annual revenue; franchise valuations are among the highest in global sports, with a huge merchandising market (jerseys, sneakers, etc.).

Basketball is not alone in this globalization. The pattern of more and more foreign stars repeats in what has long been considered the American sport, baseball. On Major League Baseball’s opening day in 2026, 249 players—26.3 percent of the league—were born outside the United States. The Dominican Republic led with 93 players, Venezuela had 60, Cuba 20, Canada 19, and Japan 14. Others came from Mexico, Puerto Rico, Panama, Curaçao, Colombia, South Korea, Australia, Aruba, the Bahamas, Honduras, Nicaragua, Taiwan, and South Africa.

The reigning king of American baseball is a non-American. Shohei Ohtani, born in Japan, is now arguably the most extraordinary player the sport has ever seen. Both an elite pitcher and an elite hitter, Ohtani rightly challenges Babe Ruth as the sport’s greatest player. He is already a four-time Most Valuable Player winner. More and more postgame interviews now happen through translators because many of the game’s biggest stars, like Ohtani, are not native English speakers.

Politicians increasingly tell voters to fear foreigners. In Switzerland, we are told non-Swiss workers cause traffic jams and drive up housing costs. But Switzerland’s own national soccer team offers a similar picture of globalization. Several of its most prominent players have dual citizenship or family roots abroad. Yet the same anti-immigration voters will root for the entire team during the upcoming World Cup.

Like Swiss soccer fans, Americans cheer foreign-born athletes not despite where they come from but because of what they bring: talent, discipline, style, and victory. Tens of thousands of fans in Oklahoma City rise for a Canadian. Denver adores a Serbian. San Antonio chants for a Frenchman. Los Angeles embraces a Slovenian. Baseball stadiums roar for a Japanese superstar.

Sports does not erase xenophobia. It does not resolve the asylum debate or settle border politics despite the Olympic ideal. There is an important paradox. The rhetoric of exclusion collides every day with a simpler reality: people admire excellence wherever it comes from when it helps their team win. The crowds see winners before they see nationality, even as many of them vote for politicians running on xenophobia. U.S. sports crowds—many of whom voted for Trump and admire his hard line on immigration—seem perfectly happy cheering non-Americans.

The NBA’s first team may say something larger about the country. Politicians may still campaign on borders and walls. Donald Trump and Stephen Miller may continue to denigrate foreigners, but America’s sports fans keep rooting for the world.

To understand the importance of the Knicks to New York, see The New Yorker editor David Remnick’s recent description of the first time the Knicks won the NBA crown: “May 8, 1970, was the night of all sporting New York nights,” he wrote. “Bliss it was in that dawn to be alive! So proclaimed the voices of the Knicks: John F. X. Condon at the Garden, Marv Albert on the air.”

How I remember that night! “Bliss it was to be alive.” After decades of waiting to see the Knicks back in the Finals and more than half a century since we last won the title, I just want my team to win this year, no matter who hits the winning baskets, American or otherwise. Go Knicks!

Daniel Warner is the author of An Ethic of Responsibility in International Relations. (Lynne Rienner). He lives in Geneva.