The one bizarre FIFA demand that saw Soldier Field reject chance to host 2026 World Cup matches

Chicago remains one of the biggest cities absent from the 2026 World Cup host list, and fresh comments from former mayor Rahm Emanuel have shed more light on why the city ultimately walked away from the tournament.

Despite hosting matches during the 1994 World Cup and boasting the iconic Soldier Field, the city decided the financial risks and demands placed upon the city were simply too great.

Why Soldier Field said no to hosting games at 2026 World Cup

Speaking to The Athletic, Emanuel revealed that one particular clause in FIFA's hosting agreement proved to be the deal-breaker.

According to the ex-mayor, FIFA wanted host cities to agree to a provision allowing the governing body to request a dome be installed over stadiums if required.

While FIFA reportedly stated it had never exercised such a clause before, Emanuel refused to leave Chicago taxpayers potentially exposed to what could have been a hugely expensive project at Soldier Field, which just hosted the USMNT's final warm-up game against Germany.

The stadium is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, meaning any major structural changes would have been especially complicated.

Beyond the dome issue, Chicago also objected to several other aspects of FIFA's hosting requirements, including public spending commitments, security costs, transportation obligations and tax-related requests.

Emanuel argued that the financial risk largely fell on local taxpayers while FIFA retained most of the revenue generated by the tournament.

As a result, Chicago withdrew from the bidding process despite being viewed as one of the strongest potential host cities in the United States.

FGG says: This FIFA request sums up why some cities walked away

Of all the reasons Chicago rejected the World Cup, the idea of potentially having to install a dome over Soldier Field – just for the tournament – is probably the most surprising.

Whether FIFA ever intended to use the clause is almost beside the point.

From the city's perspective, agreeing to leave the door open to a potential nine-figure expense was always going to be difficult to justify.

More broadly, the story highlights the balancing act many host cities face when major tournaments come calling. The prestige is enormous, but so too can be the costs and obligations behind the scenes.

With ticket prices, transport costs, and public spending already generating controversy ahead of kickoff, Chicago's decision back in 2018 is attracting fresh attention.

Looking back now, it's perhaps easier to understand why city officials decided the deal wasn't right for them.