I had not heard about this. It doesn't really surprise me, as FIFA have repeatedly shown themselves to be parochial and highly political. I think in their ideal world soccer (futbol) would remain a European sport.

That said, there are some legitimate reasons to not sanction high altitude matches. Starting with -- surprise! -- the altitude. The human body loses 4% of its oxygen uptake capacity for every 1000 feet above sea level. 2500 meters = about 8200 feet. That means the players would be competing with ~68% of their oxygen capacity. In La Paz they would have barely half. To me that's significant and could easily distort the result. Futbol is a running game, not a wheezing endurance contest.


>Recently there is an outcry in some Andean countries, over a decision by the FIFA, banning international football matches at altitudes above 2500 Meters. In Bolivia, for example, that would exclude La Paz (ca. 3700 meters), as well as Cochabamba, and Bolivia's capital, Sucre.
>
>Even people who live in Cochabamba (ca. 2600 meters) may have trouble when getting to La Paz. At least I do, but I am not a sportsman.
>
>According to this ruling, matches might still be played in Santa Cruz, a large city in the lowlands (the largest city in Bolivia? - not quite sure), but still, Bolivianos feel hurt in their national pride, and the president himself - quite fond of football - is getting involved.
>
>Some say that if football is banned at high altitudes, it might just as well be banned in places that are too hot, for example.