Atlanta reportedly recorded the highest number of incidents, with 36 incursions near sporting events. Authorities there are said to have carried out 20 mitigations and seized 11 drones.
Across the eight venues included in the account:
The report does not establish whether any of the drones carried explosives or other dangerous devices. That uncertainty is central: a harmless breach and a hostile operation may look similar in the first moments, but require entirely different responses.
Mullin’s comments underline the technological imbalance facing event organisers. Offensive drone capability may be advancing faster than the defensive systems designed to protect stadiums, transport routes and public gatherings.
That leaves authorities balancing speed with restraint. Disabling a drone over a packed crowd carries its own risks, while failing to act could allow a device to reach a sensitive area. Coordination between local police, federal agencies and venue operators will therefore be as important as the equipment itself.
The published figures reportedly do not cover every World Cup location, with Los Angeles, Miami and New Jersey absent from the venue list despite separate reports of drone activity. As the tournament progresses, the next storyline will be whether counter-drone measures can become consistent across every host city - before a security concern becomes a match-day crisis.