In professional soccer, marijuana policy is less a patchwork of league-by-league rules than a shared global compliance framework. The key reason: most top competitions ultimately plug into the World Anti-Doping Code and the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) Prohibited List—either directly or via FIFA, confederations, and national anti-doping organizations.

The baseline: WADA’s rule on cannabis (THC)

Under the WADA Prohibited List, THC (tetrahydrocannabinol) and other cannabinoids (with an important exception for CBD) are prohibited in-competition, not year-round. The current framework also treats THC as a “Substance of Abuse,” which can affect how sanctions are handled depending on circumstances and proof of out-of-competition use.

Two details shape how soccer leagues apply this in practice:

• “In-competition” is the danger zone. Athletes can be tested in-competition and (in many systems) out-of-competition—but cannabis violations generally hinge on an in-competition positive under WADA’s cannabinoids category.
• The THC urine threshold matters. WADA’s current approach uses a higher threshold than in past decades (commonly cited as 150 ng/mL for THC metabolite), intended to focus enforcement on use closer to competition rather than distant, off-day use.

FIFA: the global anchor

For international soccer, FIFA’s Anti-Doping Regulations are built to align with the World Anti-Doping Code and the annually updated Prohibited List. That means marijuana policy at the FIFA level effectively tracks WADA: THC is prohibited in-competition, and cases are processed under anti-doping rules rather than local legalization debates.

This matters because FIFA’s framework influences confederation tournaments and international windows, where testing and jurisdiction may differ from a player’s domestic league routine.

UEFA and Europe’s “big five” leagues

UEFA’s own player-facing anti-doping materials make the policy plain: the prohibited list includes “recreational drugs like cannabis,” and players are repeatedly warned that common products (including supplements) can create risk.

At the domestic level, major European leagues (Premier League, LaLiga, Bundesliga, Serie A, Ligue 1) operate through national systems and football associations that are Code-compliant. England is a clear example: The FA’s anti-doping regulations mirror WADA’s approach—testing can occur in-competition and out-of-competition, while cannabinoids are listed as prohibited in-competition (with CBD carved out).

UK Anti-Doping also reinforces the practical takeaway for players: CBD itself isn’t prohibited, but other cannabinoids (including THC) are prohibited in-competition, and product contamination or mislabeling remains a recurring risk.

Major League Soccer and the U.S. structure

In the United States, anti-doping in soccer is tightly linked to USADA and the WADA list—USADA guidance states directly that marijuana and cannabinoids are prohibited in-competition under WADA. Separately, U.S. Soccer supports and complies with USADA’s policies and protocols, reinforcing that the WADA framework sits underneath elite soccer participation in the U.S. ecosystem.

The real-world bottom line

Across major pro soccer leagues, the headline is consistent: THC isn’t treated like “no big deal” just because a city or country legalized cannabis. The practical compliance question is timing (in-competition), testing exposure, and product risk—especially with mislabeled “CBD” products.