Forbes46%

New Jersey Seeks Cut From FIFA’s $450 World Cup Grass Patches, Report Says 45%

By Antonio Pequeño IV52%

7/14/2026, 5:01:18 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 18 faulty reasoning types, including Negativity Bias, Anchoring Bias, and Availability Heuristic, with Appeal to Authority as the most egregious example at 32.3% saturation with 130 hits. Analysis detected 836 faulty-reasoning hits from 403 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 47.7% and a BS Rank of 45% (12,077 of 21,887 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 55.20% of the article peer group.

Gov. 
Mikie Sherrill’s, D-N.J., office wants in on FIFA’s plan to sell patches of grass from the field of the World Cup final, according to Politico, as the federation looks to generate over $11 million from the sale. 
Sean Higgins, a spokesperson for Sherrill, told Politico, “New Jersey paid for the vast majority of the total expense for the pitch at MetLife stadium, so New Jersey taxpayers should share in any proceeds from this latest money grab.” 
The World Cup will feature a match between Spain and either England or Argentina, and will be played in MetLife Stadium in New Jersey on July 19. 
FIFA, according to multiple outlets, is selling small pieces of grass from the field for $450 per piece, with three other versions priced at $900, $1,200 and $3,000. 
If New Jersey and FIFA strike an agreement, it is unclear how the proceeds will go to taxpayers in the state. 
Forbes has reached out to Sherrill’s office for comment. 
What Exactly Do The Grass Patches Include? 
The $450, $900 and $1,200 tiers include 2.5″ x 2.5″ x 2.5″ patches of grass. 
Though it is unclear what differentiates them, it is possible patches from the goal area, penalty spot and center circle could cost more. 
The $3,000 version has a 3″ x 3″ x 3″ section, a gold-etched metal souvenir ticket, a mini replica World Cup final ball and a crystal-cut glass World Cup trophy, according to The Athletic, which says FIFA could generate $11.2 million if all pieces sell out. 
Key Background 
FIFA has sold grass patches before, offering pieces from the Club World Cup final between Chelsea and Paris Saint-Germain last year. 
The items were sold in a glass-encased cube containing real grass and soil from the final. 
Grass patches from this year’s World Cup final are one of several pricey items offered by FIFA for the tournament. 
Soccer’s governing body is also selling limited edition host city jerseys for $375 a piece. 
Tickets for the tournament have been historically high, though various matchups including the quarterfinal matchup between Belgium and Spain have seen prices tumble on the secondary market. 
Tickets for the World Cup final start at $7,443 on the secondary market as of Tuesday, according to TickPick. 
Further Reading 
Ticket Prices Collapse Nearly 60% For World Cup Quarterfinal Match After USA, Portugal Eliminated (Forbes) 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 2.1%Forbes: 3.1%Confirmation Bias0.0%This article: 24.6%Antonio Pequeño IV: 2.7%Forbes: 1.2%Anchoring Bias24.6%This article: 16.1%Antonio Pequeño IV: 5.7%Forbes: 3.0%Availability Heuristic16.1%This article: 5.2%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.4%Forbes: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic5.2%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.4%Forbes: 2.3%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 5.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 11.0%Forbes: 5.8%Framing Effect5.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.2%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 11.4%Antonio Pequeño IV: 2.9%Forbes: 3.9%Optimism Bias11.4%This article: 5.7%Antonio Pequeño IV: 1.1%Forbes: 1.3%Pessimism Bias5.7%This article: 25.1%Antonio Pequeño IV: 23.7%Forbes: 5.4%Negativity Bias25.1%This article: 9.7%Antonio Pequeño IV: 2.3%Forbes: 0.9%Self-Serving Bias9.7%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.9%Forbes: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.5%Forbes: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.6%In-Group Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.1%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 4.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.3%Forbes: 3.2%Halo Effect4.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 6.7%Antonio Pequeño IV: 1.5%Forbes: 1.6%Recency Bias6.7%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.9%Forbes: 0.3%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.1%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.1%Straw Man0.0%This article: 32.3%Antonio Pequeño IV: 5.1%Forbes: 4.6%Appeal to Authority32.3%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.5%Forbes: 1.6%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.5%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.2%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 5.7%Antonio Pequeño IV: 2.1%Forbes: 5.7%Hasty Generalization5.7%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.7%Forbes: 0.1%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 1.6%Forbes: 0.7%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 13.4%Antonio Pequeño IV: 3.9%Forbes: 3.8%Appeal to Emotion13.4%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.8%Forbes: 1.0%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.5%Forbes: 2.8%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.0%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 5.2%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.4%Forbes: 0.3%Burden of Proof5.2%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.4%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.3%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 2.8%Forbes: 2.0%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 6.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 1.5%Forbes: 1.8%Ambiguity (Equivocation)6.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 6.7%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.7%Forbes: 0.1%Middle Ground6.7%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.6%Forbes: 1.1%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 2.6%Forbes: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 9.7%Antonio Pequeño IV: 9.9%Forbes: 4.6%Biased Writer Voice9.7%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 2.5%Indoctrination0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 2.9%Forbes: 0.4%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Antonio Pequeño IV: 0.0%Forbes: 0.2%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 15.1%Antonio Pequeño IV: 1.1%Forbes: 5.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…15.1%

403 words analyzed.

Speakers

2speakers12%attributed speech355writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 1 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 37 words • 0.0% coverageSean Higgins • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 28 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageForbes • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 7 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 23 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 46 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 21 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 16 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 27 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverage
Selected voice

Sean Higgins

100%flagged-word coverage
39 attributed words81% of attributed speech91% writer coverage
0%50.0%100.0%Biased Writer Voice+100.0 ptsWriter: 0.0%Sean Higgins: 100.0%100.0%Attempt to Sell a Product -17.2 ptsWriter: 17.2%Sean Higgins: 0.0%0.0%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.