|
After 37 days, 102 matches, and 9,360 minutes of football we are almost at the end of the 2026 World Cup.
There have been 297 goals and 14 red cards in that time, and 335 incidents flagged for VAR, although only 17 prompted a formal review, which seems too low a number given it felt as though it affected almost every game.
While these are all impressive figures, none come close to being the most eye-opening.
That is reserved for the estimated US$13 billion Fifa has made out of this four-year cycle, some US$8.9 billion of which has been generated by the tournament itself.
To put that in perspective, US$7.5 billion in total was generated between the 2018 edition in Russia and the one four years ago in Qatar.
The 2024 Olympics in Paris made a paltry US$5.24 billion in comparison.
North America’s economic engine has powered the most profitable tournament in history, which is great for Fifa, but does not necessarily bode well for the future.
There has already been talk of a 64-team tournament in 2030, when matches will be held across two separate continents and in six countries, not three.
Fifa boss Gianni Infantino has fallen back on the old reliable of growing the game, or in his case, insisting, “the World Cup is for everyone, not just Europe and South America”.
“Every nation should have the dream of qualifying for the World Cup. If we don’t give smaller countries a chance, they won’t have the motivation to keep developing,” Infantino said.
Given the Swiss lawyer’s personality, the cynical might look at that and consider the comment to be nothing more than a smokescreen for the real motivation – even more cash in the coffers.
But even if we were to take Infantino at face value, then creating a bloated 64-team tournament would still be a bad idea, because elite sport is not for everyone, it isn’t meant to include those countries, or athletes, who have no business breathing the same air as the very best.
China, as an example, played in a World Cup, they can dream of qualifying, but there is almost no evidence that the country is developing as a footballing nation.
If they had squeaked in this time around, they could have well fared worse than Scotland, whose own performance raised questions about the merits of a larger tournament.
Hong Kong can dream of playing in a World Cup, but you could expand to 80 teams and the city would still fall well short.
Allowing either to qualify by becoming almost unwieldy in size does not grow the game, it just dilutes what is already there.
If Fifa are determined to have 64 teams, then they should either host a pre-tournament in South America before the opening games to whittle down the main event to 48 teams, or have a World Plate where 32 teams play in a second-tier competition and the winners get a spot in the next World Cup.
Obviously, the latter wouldn’t generate the same kind of revenue, but from a sporting perspective it might have more credibility, something both Fifa and Infantino desperately need.
 |
| Josh Ball |
News Editor, Sport & Racing
|
| 
