Extreme heat is emerging as a serious concern for players, officials, and fans at the newly expanded Club World Cup being hosted in the United States. The tournament, which begins this weekend, coincides with forecasts predicting temperatures above 30°C in key host cities such as Miami and Los Angeles. While the opening match in Miami featuring Lionel Messi’s Inter Miami is scheduled for 8pm to avoid peak heat, other fixtures, including a midday clash at the uncovered Rose Bowl in Pasadena, will take place during the hottest hours of the day.
The Club World Cup has already sparked debate due to its expanded format, additional fixtures, and the growing influence of FIFA in the club game. However, it now faces a challenge that transcends football governance: the accelerating impact of climate change. The US has already experienced nine of the ten hottest years in its history over the past three decades, with average temperatures rising steadily.
Evidence from recent tournaments shows the risks are not theoretical. Last year’s Copa América, also held in the US, witnessed multiple heat-related incidents. A Uruguayan player was withdrawn due to dizziness and dehydration, and an assistant referee collapsed during a game in Kansas City. These events underscore the physical danger posed by extreme temperatures not only to players on the pitch but to thousands of fans in exposed stadiums.
Of the 63 matches scheduled in the Club World Cup, 35 are set to kick off before 5pm. Research shows that many of the tournament venues have limited or no protection from the elements. Moreover, several host cities have experienced notable heat events in recent years. With teams expected to travel over half a million kilometers collectively, the tournament also raises concerns about its environmental footprint.
FIFA regulations currently allow for a single cooling break per half if the wet-bulb globe temperature exceeds 32°C. However, the global players’ union, FifPro, argues that these measures are outdated and insufficient. It recommends lowering the threshold for cooling breaks, allowing two per half when necessary, and rescheduling matches altogether if conditions become unsafe.
Despite ongoing monitoring, FIFA has yet to introduce new safeguards against extreme heat. The scheduling of matches designed to meet broadcasting demands makes rescheduling unlikely, even in hazardous conditions. This reactive approach highlights the tension between commercial priorities and player welfare.
As the tournament unfolds, it may offer vital insights into how global football must adapt to a warming world. With a 48-team World Cup set for next year across similarly hot regions, the lessons learned now could prove critical. Player health, fan safety, and the sustainability of such mega-events must become central to future planning in an era of climate uncertainty.
