Why we should follow the lead of US politicians at this World Cup

Zohran Mamdani, New York’s mayor, is fighting for the fans – thousands of tickets for New York residents at $50, affordable food programmes, "soccer streets" for school students and non-profiting fan zones. When was the last time a brand truly went to similar lengths to make a difference?

In my lifetime I can’t think of another international tournament which has had such an apathetic build up. And no, it’s not just because of Thomas Tuchel’s selection (we just love moaning, don’t we?), it’s because of the growing disconnect between football the game and football the TV show. There’s a blinkered rampage to attach entities to the "product", at the cost of everything and everyone that has come before. Football is built on bringing through the next generation of matchgoing fans, but organisations, clubs and sponsors need to treat them as foundations, not just fodder for an emotional end of season highlight reel.

Speak to any matchgoing fan at the top clubs – those where tickets symbolise a modern day gold rush – and you’ll hear stories of how legacy fans are having their access chipped away at. Where do fans’ ire land? Naturally the clubs, but Stockholm Syndrome often dampens this. So then it’s the "corporates", those who are part of multi-million pound sponsorship deals that scoop up tens of thousands of tickets.

This World Cup is shaping up to be the tipping point of the conversation. With even the most die-hard of fans across the globe priced out, we’re set to have stadiums filled with those with the deepest pockets or there on a freebie. Those aren’t the people that created the fever pitch "product" that we all clamour for. The question is: are brands caring enough about how their association with modern football looks? Is there a pause for thought about how pitchside advertising looks when the backdrop isn’t a sea of Dutch or Argentinian colours, but instead first-timers on a cultural safari?

You can use budgets to produce all the cinematic, high-end and star studded content all you like, but fans will ultimately remember which brands did something impactful for them in IRL, rather than via URL. Football needs sponsorship. The billions pumped into the game have undoubtedly improved access, interest, exposure and helped move the game away from the dark reputation it held in the 80's. But it increasingly feels as though brands now see matchgoers as an interchangeable cast in the backdrop of a sporty soap drama.

I don’t think it’s hyperbolic to say we’re at a crossroads – brands can either be enablers or prohibitors to matchgoing fans. Currently, it feels like too many are sleepwalking into the later category.

They say keep politics out of football. We should actually be following its example.