The proposition to expand the 2030 World Cup to a 64-team format has encountered significant resistance, particularly from influential figures within the global football community. CONCACAF President Victor Montagliani has voiced strong opposition to the idea, echoing similar sentiments expressed by UEFA and the Asian Football Confederation (AFC). This burgeoning dissent casts serious doubt on the feasibility of the South American proposal, championed by CONMEBOL President Alejandro Dominguez, to commemorate the tournament’s centenary with an expanded format. The debate centers on the optimal size and structure of the World Cup, balancing the desire for inclusivity with the potential impact on the quality of play, player welfare, and the overall football ecosystem.
Montagliani’s rejection stems from a conviction that expanding the tournament to 64 teams would be detrimental to the World Cup itself and the broader football landscape. He argues that such a drastic expansion would negatively affect national teams, club competitions, leagues, and individual players. His stance emphasizes the need for a measured approach to growth, particularly given the imminent transition to a 48-team format for the 2026 World Cup hosted by the USA, Canada, and Mexico. Montagliani asserts that it is premature to contemplate further expansion before even experiencing the dynamics of the newly adopted 48-team structure. This cautious approach reflects a concern for maintaining the integrity and competitiveness of the tournament while assessing the impact of the upcoming changes.
The AFC President, Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al Khalifa, has also expressed his disapproval of the expansion proposal, stating that the decision to proceed with a 48-team format for the 2030 World Cup had already been finalized. He warned that reopening the discussion could lead to further escalating demands for even larger expansions, potentially creating chaos and undermining the structure of the tournament. This concern highlights the potential for a slippery slope effect, where accommodating one expansion could trigger a cascade of requests, ultimately leading to an unwieldy and unsustainable format. The emphasis here is on maintaining the stability and predictability of the World Cup structure, ensuring that decisions are made thoughtfully and with long-term consequences in mind.
UEFA President Aleksander Ceferin has similarly dismissed the proposal as a “bad idea,” further reinforcing the resistance from major football confederations. The collective opposition from these key stakeholders represents a significant hurdle for the South American proposal. It underscores the importance of consensus-building within FIFA and the need for a comprehensive evaluation of the potential ramifications of such a substantial expansion. The shared concerns across multiple confederations suggest a prevailing sentiment that a 64-team format would be excessive and potentially detrimental to the overall health of the sport.
While CONMEBOL President Alejandro Dominguez has argued that the expansion could be a one-off event to mark the centenary of the World Cup, the widespread resistance suggests that the proposal faces an uphill battle. Dominguez’s suggestion to include matches in three South American nations as part of the 2030 tournament, alongside the primary hosts Spain, Portugal, and Morocco, adds another layer of complexity to the discussion. This proposal aims to acknowledge the historical significance of Uruguay hosting the inaugural World Cup in 1930, but it also raises logistical and organizational challenges that need careful consideration.
FIFA, the governing body of world football, faces the challenge of navigating these conflicting viewpoints and making a final determination on the format for the 2030 World Cup. While FIFA Secretary-General Mattias Grafstrom has indicated that the South American proposal will be analyzed, the strong opposition from several confederations suggests that the likelihood of its adoption is slim. The decision will require a delicate balancing act, weighing the desire for broader participation with the potential risks of over-expansion. Ultimately, FIFA must prioritize the long-term health and sustainability of the World Cup, ensuring that it remains a prestigious and competitive tournament while respecting the diverse perspectives of its member associations. The debate highlights the inherent tension between expanding access to the global stage and preserving the quality and integrity of the competition.
