The men’s World Cup has narrowly averted a full-blown identity crisis, thanks to FIFA’s decision to reject a 64-team format. The proposal forced a fundamental debate about the tournament’s purpose: is it an elite competition to crown the best team in the world, or is it a global festival of participation? By rejecting the expansion, FIFA has firmly sided with the former.
The push from South America for a 64-team tournament represented a significant move towards the “festival of participation” model. By making qualification easier for a third of its members, it prioritized inclusivity and representation over the principle of competitive excellence.
This triggered a powerful counter-reaction from those who believe the World Cup’s identity is rooted in its elite nature. Figures like Aleksander Ceferin and the majority of the FIFA Council argued that the tournament’s prestige is derived from its difficulty. It is a stage reserved for the best of the best, and watering down that standard would be a betrayal of its history and purpose.
The debate forced FIFA to confront this central question about the tournament’s soul. A move to 64 teams would have fundamentally and perhaps irreversibly altered its character, making it a bigger but less significant event.
By holding the line at 48, FIFA has resolved the immediate crisis. It has affirmed that while the tournament can be made more inclusive, its core identity as the pinnacle of sporting achievement must not be compromised. The World Cup, for now, knows what it is.
Picture Credit: www.flickr.com
