Research on the connection between sport and social transformation in the Middle East has been lacking; from a historiographical standpoint, sport in the British colonial period of Egypt has been virtually ignored. My paper addresses this lacuna by investigating the period between the mid-1930s and the early-1950s, where Egypt’s sporting infrastructure transitioned from a model administered by foreign interests into one that promulgated nationalist aims. By analyzing official reports of the National Committee of Sport and popular journals such as Egyptian Sports, I argue that, in conjunction with contemporary political trends, sport played a critical role in the mobilization and success of the 1952 Revolution. Adapting John Hargreaves’ theory that power is the outcome of constantly contested discourses and strategies, and that sport is one of the most prominent realms in which these contests play out, I argue that Britain began a period of “hegemonic restructuring” in mid-1930s Egypt. While this was most noticeable in the political sphere with the signing of the 1936 Anglo-Egyptian Treaty, it was facilitated at a popular level by changes in the realm of sports, where indigenous Egyptians desired more “access”, both in the literal sense of being eligible for membership in foreign clubs and the metaphorical sense of controlling the ideological discourses that surrounded sport. Foreign elites, meanwhile, wanted to maintain hegemony over these kinds of access. Thus, just as the Anglo-Egyptian Treaty granted Egyptians little more than nominal independence, foreign powers were only willing to permit superficially indigenous gestures towards nationalism in sport in order to earn mass support. This process was drawn out by World War II and interrupted by the outbreak of the 1952 Revolution, which led to the expulsion of foreign elites and allowed indigenous actors to take control of sport and government. The nation transitioned successfully from foreign-domination to a nationalistic model because the Revolution allowed indigenous groups to take the reins during a critical period of hegemonic flux and adaptation. In explaining how sports institutions endured, I conclude that in July 1952, sport facilitated and inspired the militant release of simmering political tensions.