How will Israel’s chances be affected by expanded World Cup field?
The expansion of the World Cup to 48 teams starting from 2026 was received with mixed reactions across the world.
While there were those who said it would hurt the level of competition and result in a dull group stage, in Africa and Asia in particular it was warmly welcomed as it is set to ensure greater representation for nations from those continents.
For Israel, it is unlikely to make much of a difference, with Europe expected to see its allocation grow from 13 to 16 teams. Israel failed to qualify for Euro 2016 even though the tournament included 24 teams from UEFA.
Current proposals, which look likely to be ratified by FIFA, would see Africa’s allocation almost double from 5 to 9, while Asia will go from 4.5 to 8.5. South America’s quota will grow from 4.5 to 6, with Concacaf going from 3.5 to 6.5 and Oceania receiving one guaranteed spot instead of having to win a playoff against a Concacaf side in order to qualify.
The decision marks the first change that will be made to the World Cup format since the expansion to 32 teams in 1998.
Listed below are the changes that will take place, and the likely pros and cons of the decision:
The changes
The most obvious change is the number of teams competing in the tournament proper. From the previous 32 teams, the list of participating nations will go up to 48.
According to the new format, the 48 teams competing in the group stage will be split into 16 groups of three teams each.
The top two teams of each group will proceed to the knockout stages which will start from the round of 32 and go all the way to the final.
The number of matches in the tournament will rise from 64 to 80, but no team will play more than seven matches during the tournament. This means that the number of matches played by each team remains the same from the current tournament format.
Hence the champion team’s match schedule during the tournament will look something like this:
Group match 1 -> Group match 2 -> Round of 32 -> Round of 16 -> Quarterfinal -> Semifinal -> Final
The pros
In FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s words, the idea behind the expansion proposal was to make the World Cup “more inclusive.”
“There is nothing bigger in terms of boosting football in a country than participating in a World Cup,” Infantino had said during a conference in Dubai in December 2016.
The expanded format will mean 16 additional qualification slots to be distributed among the six continental confederations.
With the new format, Asian and African countries are set to benefit as they are likely to receive more slots meaning more Asian and African countries will play in the 2026 World Cup.
The decision was also backed by federations of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland under the understanding that Europe would receive at least three more slots to take their participation up to 16 nations.
Before the decision was made, Scottish FA chief executive Stewart Regan drew reference to the expanded Euro 2016 format while expressing support for Infantino’s plan, citing the examples of Wales, Iceland and Northern Ireland in saying, the expansion will be “a positive thing for the smaller nations.”
In addition, the expansion will also lead to increased profits for FIFA.
FIFA’s internal research has suggested the expanded format will increase revenues by £800 million from increased broadcasting, sponsor deals and ticket sales. This is expected to raise the total profits from the World Cup to nearly 3.5 billion pounds.
The cons
The biggest detractors to the expansion plan were English Football Association chief executive Martin Glenn and German Football Association president Reinhard Grindel, both of whom preferred the current 32-team format because a change could affect the quality of the tournament.
Grindel said adding more teams could “strengthen the imbalance” seen in some international tournaments while Glenn had said, “Our preference would be to keep the tournament smaller, because there’s a quality factor here.”
Whether the quality of the game will be affected will only be known once the tournament begins.
Aside from those concerns, Venezuelan Football Federation president Laureano Gonzalez was not completely in favor of the new qualification format proposed alongside the new tournament format.
As part of the proposal for the 2026 World Cup, FIFA had proposed merging the qualification phase for North and South America. At present, 35 CONCACAF teams compete for 3 or 4 slots and 10 CONMEBOL teams compete for 4 or 5 slots.
Gonzalez had said 45 teams competing for seven slots was not viable but if North and South America were given at least 14 slots like Europe, “the idea would catch on.”
Changes but still the same
The European Club Association (ECA) – a body which represents top professional clubs in Europe – said before the vote that the increased format would not be suitable as it would lead to more player injuries because of more matches and a congested fixtures calendar.
ECA chairman Karl-Heinz Rummenigge said the new format was more of a political and commercial venture on Infantino’s part than something that would help the betterment of football.
However, in keeping that in mind, Infantino’s team created the new format that would not increase number of matches for each team during the tournament.
Furthermore, in an attempt to keep the top European clubs happy, the proposed plan schedules the tournament to begin and end within 32 days, same as the current format.
(Hindustan Times/TNS) Allon Sinai contributed to this report.