Towards the end of 2021 the idea of a biennial World Cup was initiated by current FIFA president Gianni Infantino. The concept, as its title suggests, proposes the World Cup competition be every two years compared to the usual four year format that we all know of. This idea has brought with it an interesting debate with players, coaches, football associations and fans amongst those who are vociferously making their arguments as to why the World Cup should maintain its current timeline or whether it is time for FIFA to shake up the structure of the biggest sporting event in the world.

The idea is being spearheaded by Arsène Wenger, former world renowned manager of Arsenal, who now occupies the post of Head of Global Football Development at FIFA. The idea has been regarded as extraordinary and unprecedented given that since 1930 the only interruptions that have caused the World Cup not to be held every four years was in 1942 and 1946 due to the Second World War.

The African, Asian and North American federations have all signaled their approval of the idea. A World Cup held every four years allows for other continental events such as the Euros, South America’s Copa America, the Africa Cup of Nations and the Asian Cup all to be played within this same period. FIFA has given no indication thus far as to how the qualifying processes for these competitions may change as a result of a biennial World Cup but its decision to expand from thirty-six teams to forty-eight in the upcoming World Cup in 2026 suggests that FIFA is not hesitant to make changes going forward. 

Amongst the advantages proffered for a biennial World Cup, profit has often been cited as the major one. By hosting the competition that is widely regarded as the biggest sporting event on earth, FIFA will hope to dominate the world’s attention and retain its relevance during the period where traditionally the competition is only in early qualifying stages. Keeping the World Cup brand in the eyes and ears of the world will encourage greater revenue generating potential. To support this idea, FIFA has released a comprehensive report estimating a $4.4 billion increase in revenue increasing grants given to each member association. This will allow for the creation of a new fund which would assist individual member associations in developing infrastructure for both players and coaches alike. This assistance will be aimed at the member associations like those in Africa, Asia and South America, who have traditionally relied on FIFA’s grants more than the wealthier associations like those in Europe.

The idea is therefore a commendable one with an underlying aim of inclusivity and an impetus to make football unquestionably global. Players like Kevin De Bruyne have claimed that the World Cup occurring every two years is ‘not a bad idea’ as long as rest for players is guaranteed at the end of the season.

While players and federations have expressed support for the biennial World Cup, many have voiced concerns over its effects. One such concern is player health and well-being. Two of the most well-known footballers, Kylian Mbappe and Robert Lewandowski, have recently asserted that a World Cup every two years will drastically impact player performance. While conceding that it is possible for players to compete within the changed time-frame, they pointed out that level of performances will be adversely affected. The goal (no pun intended) is to have the best performances from players on football’s biggest stage and therefore this should be an incentive to protect their well-being and monitor issues such as player fatigue.

As previously mentioned, players will have to represent their national teams at continental events and as such the increased amount of minutes played can become a serious issue. In the 2020-2021 season, Manchester United midfielder Bruno Fernandes played 72 matches for club and the Portuguese national team, accumulating over 5,500 minutes. Not far behind in minutes played was young Pedri from Barcelona who at the tender age of 19 years old, appeared 62 times and played 4,368 minutes during the same season. With the creation of a biennial World Cup, the number of minutes played will only increase, creating a crowded fixture list for many players. This also potentially opens the door to an increase in injuries and travel, which in the context of the Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) presents itself as an issue.

Another potential drawback is the special nature of the competition itself. While a shorter wait for more World Cup football may be a welcomed change from some fans’ perspective, it has been argued that staging it every two years may have the effect of diluting the significance of the event. Players and coaches dream of making it to World Cup and a high level of preparation goes into qualifying and progressing to the final rounds. The argument is essentially that scarcity creates value and with an increase in the frequency in which the World Cup is held, there may be a decrease in the value of it. There is a certain sporting romance that is generated every four years for the World Cup that may lose its hold on fans if this proposed change is implemented.

Many high profile detractors have surfaced in the world of football. President of UEFA, Aleksander Cerferin has publicly said that he is opposed to the idea, citing fears that women’s football may suffer a loss of revenue and damage to exposure because of the brighter spotlight on the men’s World Cup. Further, Cerferin expressed concerns over the re-scheduling of other competitions such as the Euros. Former president of FIFA, Sepp Blatter, has also chimed in tweeting on January 5^th of this year “Concerning the biennial World Cup: We must not forget that the basis of our game are the clubs and their impact to society; and if only the national teams play the club loses its right to exist, therefor a clear NO to the 2-year-rhythm of the World Cup”.

Associations have also voiced their discontent with the biennial World Cup idea. The South American association known as CONMEBOL, after a meeting in Paraguay last year in October stated that “there are no reasons, benefits or justification for the change promoted by FIFA,” and that “in view of this, the 10 countries that make up CONMEBOL confirm that they will not participate in a World Cup organised every two years”. They confirmed their position stating that “The project in question turns its back on almost 100 years of world football tradition, ignoring the history of one of the most important sporting events on the planet.”

As it stands, the idea is still in its formative stage and has not yet been tabled before the FIFA Congress with their next meeting set for March 2022 with no indication that a vote will be taken on the issue. However, given the high amount of re-scheduling and planning involved, a vote will need to be taken soon on the way forward.

Should there be a World Cup every two years? Feel free to comment and tell us what you think.