The 2026 edition is planned across 16 host cities, with 104 matches played over 39 days. That promises a wider reach and a major commercial opportunity, but Hamilton reportedly believes the scale has come at the expense of accessibility.
Previous World Cups often allowed fans to base themselves in one country and follow the competition by rail, road or short flights. In 2026, moving between fixtures could mean long journeys, new accommodation bookings and additional visa considerations.
The report says Hamilton sees the format as increasingly shaped by commercial priorities rather than the needs of travelling supporters. That is his assessment, but concerns over ticket prices, hotels and transport have already become part of the tournament debate.
Hamilton’s broader argument is cultural. He has suggested that the best World Cups were hosted by one nation, allowing the host country to absorb the event and supporters to feel immersed in it.
The United States, in particular, presents a different challenge. Its huge geography can make a tournament feel like a series of separate events rather than one nationwide celebration. Yet major football communities in cities across all three host countries could still deliver an atmosphere that challenges those fears.
The opening match in Mexico will offer an early measure of the tournament’s identity. If supporters move smoothly and local crowds embrace the occasion, the expanded format may look ambitious rather than excessive.
If travel friction dominates the conversation, Hamilton’s warning will gain weight. The first storyline to watch is whether June 11 feels like the start of one World Cup-or simply the first stop on a very long journey.