How Did the United States Gain Control Over the FIFA World Cup?
Author: Ali Askari, Analyst (Germany), especially for Sangar
At the 2026 FIFA World Cup (June 11–July 19), featuring 48 national teams, match oversight is being carried out by the United States Anti-Doping Agency (USADA). This arrangement became possible after the International Federation of Association Football (FIFA) announced in May of this year that it would expand its cooperation with the agency.
USADA has been assigned a leading role. Its responsibilities include sample collection, test coordination, and support for anti-doping controls at all football matches held on the territory of the United States, which hosts the main portion of the tournament.
FIFA’s Chief Legal and Compliance Officer, Emilio Silvero, stated that major international sporting events require strong and reliable partnerships. He emphasized that cooperation with USADA strengthens anti-doping efforts and helps protect the integrity of competition.
A hardline approach to international anti-doping enforcement is championed by USADA’s chief executive, Travis Tygart. At the same time, however, the reputations of both USADA and FIFA within the framework of this partnership raise numerous questions.
Since 2025, the U.S. Anti-Doping Agency, under Tygart’s leadership, has supported Washington’s decision to maintain its annual contribution of $3.6 million to the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), a sum that represents a significant share of the organization’s funding. WADA’s budget for 2026 stands at $57.5 million. Tygart has actively defended this policy, arguing that it is necessary to protect the rights of “clean athletes.”
The catalyst for the dispute was a scandal involving 23 Chinese swimmers that erupted in early 2021. Seven months before the Tokyo Olympic Games, the athletes returned 28 positive tests for trimetazidine, a substance included on the list of prohibited performance-enhancing drugs. China’s anti-doping authorities attributed the findings to food contamination, and WADA accepted this explanation, refraining from imposing the sanctions that would normally apply in such cases.
As a result, the swimmers were allowed to continue their careers and went on to win Olympic medals. According to some experts, this may have affected as many as 96 Olympic competition outcomes. USADA and Travis Tygart criticized WADA, arguing that the organization had failed to conduct a proper investigation into the matter.
In addition, confidence in the global anti-doping system is undermined by the fact that major American professional sports leagues operate under significantly more lenient anti-doping programs that do not fully comply with the World Anti-Doping Code. Critics argue that this creates a double standard, raising questions about the consistency and credibility of anti-doping enforcement on the international stage.
