48-team World Cup: A total success or unbearable excess? The controversial format divides football fans

The 2026 World Cup's unprecedented expansion to 48 teams, featuring 12 groups and a total of 104 matches across the United States, Mexico, and Canada, is drawing sharp debate as the group stage concludes. This significant overhaul, the first since the tournament's inception, has been met with both praise for its inclusivity and criticism for its potential impact on match quality.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino, who spearheaded the reform, argued in 2017 that "all nations have the right to dream." He emphasized that football's reach extends beyond Europe and Latin America, framing the expansion as a strategic move to enhance the sport's global appeal and development. FIFA, boasting more member associations than UN member states, sees the larger tournament as a means to increase television rights and commercial revenue, securing Infantino's re-election prospects in 2027.

The expanded format has undeniably opened doors for nations previously excluded from the global showpiece. Countries like Curaçao, Cape Verde, Haiti, Jordan, Uzbekistan, and Scotland have a greater chance of qualifying. Cape Verde's historic advancement to the knockout stage serves as a prime example of the tournament's increased accessibility.

However, the larger field has also resulted in numerous one-sided matches, raising concerns about the competitive balance and the overall spectacle. While stars remain in form and smaller teams capture attention, the debate rages on regarding whether the expansion's benefits in terms of global reach outweigh the potential dilution of competitive intensity and the loss of suspense in some encounters.

“

Todas las naciones tienen derecho a soñar. El fútbol no se limita a Europa y América Latina.