The irony of a World Cup in Trump’s America? The most multinational tournament of all-time | OneFootball

It was perhaps the perfect way to conclude the opening round of games for this World Cup. Portugal had been leading and strong favourites, Cristiano Ronaldo toiling for that goal to match the other big names, only for the comparatively more humble Yoane Wissa to plunder an emphatic equaliser.

In the joyous celebrations that followed, it wasn’t just a squad coming together but a country enjoying a national moment: DR Congo’s first-ever World Cup goal.

There have been a few moments like it, from Livano Comenencia’s goal for Curacao against Germany to Aymen Hussein’s for Iraq against Norway and even Cabo Verde securing that 0-0 draw against Spain. They’ve formed a theme of an enjoyably competitive World Cup so far, before you eventually get to the big ones that decide finals and the trophy.

open image in gallery

DR Congo players celebrate Yoane Wissa's equaliser against Portugal (Reuters)

There is also a serious point here, amid so much euphoria. Can any moment in any other sphere inspire such unity for a country, such a rush of collectivism?

It’s been described as a “benign nationalism”, and you can instantly see what it means. For some of the players and staff, though, there’s much more meaning to it than even emotional release.

They’ve worked on it.

Long before this World Cup, back at December’s draw in Washington, some of the coaches got talking at their workshops and found a common challenge.

They had noticed almost unconscious splits in dressing rooms between players born in their countries and children of the diaspora. Iraq coach Graham Arnold has been open about how such groups used to sit on separate tables, and he insisted on one big table to work against that.

Being at this World Cup alone shows the benefit.

Iraq are one of several teams with a core of players born abroad, the most notable of which was an excellent Morocco that ended up fielding a full XI from the diaspora. Wissa was similarly born outside DR Congo, in France, like many of his teammates.

Curacao meanwhile have the most, at 25 from their 26-man squad.

They are among a total of 292 players from the full 1,248 - almost a quarter - to have been born outside the country they are representing. That is the most ever, in proportional as well as absolute terms, given this is a 48-team World Cup.

open image in gallery

Iraq, managed by Australian Graham Arnold, are one of several teams with a core of players born abroad (Reuters)

And while every individual nation of course has their own relationship with the diaspora, all of them together naturally say something more about this World Cup, too; about football in an increasingly globalised world; the game in the multinational era where more and more people have multiple citizenships.

A considerable irony is that the current US administration, led by president Donald Trump, is one of many around the world actively seeking to work against this. Many of these teams have direct experience in this World Cup alone, given how few fans have been allowed to travel.

And then you see a talent with multiple nationalities like Folarin Balogun drive the ball into the roof of Paraguay’s net for USA’s best football moment in years.

This, in so many other ways, is an American dream. It’s the great global party, where the World Cup itself - and the representation it brings - only deepens the festivities.

The dynamic may also be changing football reality, too.

It may well be levelling the field, forming a factor that has been influential in the unpredictability of this World Cup.

open image in gallery

USA star Folarin Balogun was born in New York but raised in London (AP)

The Independent has long covered how the most decisive factor in modern international football has been how wealthy western European nations eventually used their immense resources to industrialise their talent infrastructures.

This was no longer about talent evolving organically. It was end product from process, and a wider sequence.

France created Clairefontaine, with Spain following them in national investment in facilities and coaching while adapting Dutch ideology, before Germany took that model and England took it even further.

This is the single biggest explanation for how almost every World Cup and Euros in this millennium has gone.

And it still is… but now, finally, with a twist that may also bring a surprise ending to this World Cup.

These countries are “processing” so much talent, from all backgrounds - and it really is a process - that there’s now considerable spillover. Economically weaker countries that have supplied migrant communities are now finally enjoying some benefit. National teams who wouldn’t otherwise have the resources and infrastructure are now able to select an increasing number of players honed by elite coaching.

For all the criticism that Fifa rightly receive, this is also one area where their regulations have helped. Eligibility rules are nowhere near as restrictive as they used to be, where youth caps or friendlies could basically dictate an entire international career. The regulations have rightly been updated and evolved to acknowledge this multinational world, where players have many national loyalties and aren’t necessarily best-placed to make a decision when mere teenagers.

From precedents like Munir El Haddadi’s switch from Spain to Morocco, even players who have three senior caps can switch allegiance if their appearances came before the age of 21.

open image in gallery

Munir El Haddadi switched from Spain to Morocco (Getty)

It can of course work both ways, and there will no doubt be Irish people reading this gesturing to Declan Rice, but the point is how better-trained talent is now better spread.

Fifa’s prize money redistribution has similarly started to raise infrastructure standards around the world, as Arsene Wenger told the Independent he wanted; even though there is justifiable criticism over how this mechanism can be used politically.

The dynamic also extends to the transfer market. More players get more time in elite environments. One academic study actually likened the global transfer market to the coffee industry, in how wealthy countries earned so much from "processing" the raw materials – in this case, the talent – rather than actually producing it.

And if that has been bad for domestic leagues, it has provided some benefit to their national teams.

The global transfer market involves humans, after all, who have their own emotions over who they might represent.

open image in gallery

Curacao celebrate their first World Cup goal against Germany (Getty)

If there will inevitably be some criticism that much of this sounds condescending to football cultures outside the elite, it is simply about the brute force of concentration of wealth.

The major western European countries accumulate and attract so much money that it’s virtually impossible for anyone else to do similar in global football’s modern economy.

This isn’t a good thing, but it might finally be having a positive effect on this World Cup and international football as a whole.

The field of properly competitive nations has never felt wider. It can be witnessed in so many joyous moments so far.