The idea of expanding the World Cup to 64 teams has sparked a heated debate in the football community. FIFA President Gianni Infantino has acknowledged the possibility of such an expansion, which could fundamentally alter the economics of the sport.
A bigger tournament would require more stadiums, hotels, and transport, but the financial implications could be even more significant. By making qualification easier for many of the game's biggest nations, a 64-team tournament could reduce the commercial value of qualifying competitions while increasing the importance of FIFA's own flagship event.
The logistical implications of another expansion are obvious, but the financial implications could prove even more significant.
The European governing body, UEFA, has opposed the idea, with President Aleksander Ceferin stating that it's not a good idea for the World Cup or the qualifiers. The Asian Football Confederation President, Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al Khalifa, has also voiced opposition, questioning where further expansion might end.
If the competition retained the same basic structure, a 64-team World Cup would comprise 128 matches, adding roughly another week to a tournament already lasting more than five weeks. This could pose significant organizational challenges, particularly for host nations.
The idea of an expanded tournament has also raised concerns about player welfare, with more matches adding to the workload of elite players. Additionally, it could reignite debate over competitive balance, tournament length, fan costs, and whether the World Cup risks losing some of its exclusivity.
As the football community weighs the pros and cons of a 64-team tournament, one thing is clear: any decision will have far-reaching implications for the sport.