A bit 'blah' or a worthy host? Is MetLife right World Cup final choice?

What the report says

BBC Sport reported that MetLife Stadium in East Rutherford, New Jersey, is facing renewed scrutiny as it prepares to host the World Cup final between Spain and Argentina on Sunday. North America correspondent Nada Tawfik examined why Fifa chose the venue, officially referred to during the tournament as NY-NJ Stadium, despite criticism of its look, transport links and playing surface.

The stadium, opened in 2010 and shared by the NFL’s Giants and Jets, holds more than 82,000 fans and has previously staged major events including the Super Bowl, WrestleMania and concerts. Critics cited by the BBC described it as uninspiring compared with newer or more distinctive venues such as SoFi Stadium near Los Angeles, AT&T Stadium near Dallas and Atlanta’s covered stadium. Fans also raised concerns about congestion around the Meadowlands site and high transport and concession costs, though train and shuttle operations were described by some as efficient.

Supporters of the decision pointed to the New York-New Jersey region’s global profile. Alex Lasry, chief executive of the Fifa World Cup 26 NYNJ Host Committee, told the BBC the area offers a major media, entertainment and commercial stage, with watch parties planned at well-known city locations. StadiumDB editor Kuba Kowalski characterized the venue as less romantic from a football perspective but commercially logical because of its market, time zone and hospitality appeal.

The BBC also noted continuing questions about the temporary natural-grass pitch installed over the stadium’s usual artificial surface. Brazil and France players and staff had earlier criticized the field as dry, hard or unusual, while Fifa said its assessments found the tournament pitches healthy and fit for play.