It is a challenge these days to avoid addressing any new FIFA proposal without a healthy dose of cynicism. Gianni Infantino’s Swiss based association are supposed to be the custodians of the global game, but instead have a stained record in operating in the most self-serving of manners. The sight of Infantino cosying up to Donald Trump at his recent inauguration will do little to dispel the commonly held view that FIFA inherently acts in its own interests.

FIFA is now considering a proposal to expand their flagship event, the World Cup, to 64 teams for the 2030 edition of the competition. This would be double the number of competitors that featured in Qatar for the 2022 competition and represents yet another increase on the agreed 48 teams for 2026. The proposal was made at a FIFA council meeting by the President of Uruguay’s football federation, Ignacio Alfonso. FIFA mandates debating any proposal, and it is understood this would initially be as a one-off for the centennial World Cup during which Uruguay is slated to host some opening round games.

A FIFA spokesman, claimed that it was “spontaneously raised” at Wednesday’s meeting. “The idea was acknowledged as FIFA has a duty to analyse any proposal from one of its council members”.

We have previously argued the merits of expanding the tournament to 48 teams. The World Cup is arguably the greatest show on earth, and it does make sense to engage with and to expand the game to as many markets as possible – this has also been the argument for hosting the tournament in traditional non-football markets. However, as with many issues there is usually a sensible balance to be found and unfortunately expansion beyond 48 teams would likely upset this.

Firstly, the addition of more teams and implicitly lower ranked teams reduces the jeopardy for the so-called major nations in the group stages. There will likely be 128 games in a 64 team format, and in all likelihood there will be more dead rubbers and imbalanced matches as a result. This is without considering the fact that qualification for the tournament will become even more of a formality for the best teams, and increase the irrelevance of the already maligned mid-season international breaks.

Part of the charm of international tournaments is the concentration of games within a single country, making the World Cup inescapable for the month that it is being played. Logistically, it will be difficult to create this with an expanded tournament, and instead hosting will likely have to be shared – as in 2030 – or be given to a nation with the size or infrastructure in place to facilitate that number of games and teams. This will likely reduce the opportunity for many developing nations to succeed in the FIFA bidding process.

There is also the often forgotten question of player welfare to be considered with an expanded tournament. The winter World Cup in Qatar was criticised for creating a lengthened domestic season in many countries, which has led to an increased rate of injuries and player burnouts. The 2030 edition is unlikely to require a change to the football calendar, but it will add additional workload for even more players, many of which are already at apparent breaking point.

PFA CEO Maheta Molango had the following to say following the 2022 World Cup in Qatar:

“The latest injury report following the Qatar World Cup is another wake-up call. It shows the reality of football’s unrelenting calendar on player health. The continued expansion of the competition calendar, both at club and international levels, is pushing players beyond their limits.”  

“Decisions to press ahead with what seems certain to be another winter World Cup in Saudi Arabia without fully assessing the fallout from Qatar 2022 are alarming. This non-stop escalation is unsustainable. Players are literally at breaking point.” 

The proposal requires debate and there is no guarantee that it will be accepted. As with anything that FIFA do, there is a commercial aspect and the potential benefits of expanding the competition further will be difficult to ignore. It is hard to see a situation where 2030 is simply a one-off for the 64 team version of the World Cup.

Would further expansion be a step too far for the World Cup?