Plan for a biannual World Cup has the support of 165 countries; UEFA and Conmebol oppose

FIFA has presented to its 211 associated federations the plan for holding the World Cup every two years, which must be approved or rejected at the General Assembly to be held in March 2022 and which, according to the first estimates, has the support of 165 countries, a majority enough to be accepted. The problem, however, is that the two most powerful confederations, UEFA, with its 55 federations, and the South American Confederation (Conmebol), with only ten but including Brazil and Argentina. The opposition of both confederations, led by Aleksander Ceferin and Alejandro Domínguez, has led them to a direct confrontation with Gianni Infantino, president of FIFA, who points to a schism in football.

The new biannual World Cup would be played with the format that will premiere in the 2026 edition, which will be played between the United States, Mexico and Canada. There will be 48 teams divided into 16 groups of three teams. The classification would be reduced to two windows (March and October) and even reduce this phase to 28 intensive days.

Biennial World Cup would generate losses of 8.9 billion dollars to the European Leagues

‘World Cup every two years would have less expectation and a lower value; it has to do with the economic aspect ‘

According to two of the most important international consultants hired by the organization, Nielsen and Open Economics, the economic impact of the World Cup will be extraordinary and it will have little impact on the international calendar. In summary, these are the conclusions that FIFA has presented to all the national federations that comprise it:

• The biennial FIFA World Cup would mean an increase of 4,400 million dollars in revenue for FIFA.
• $ 7 billion increase (48-team tournament) to $ 11.4 billion in press and TV rights, sponsorships and tickets.
• The net results of the new income stream will be distributed in the new Solidarity Fund.
• A background of 3.5 billion dollars in the first four-year cycle will be dedicated to projects for the development of football.
• On average, each federation could receive 16 million dollars in each cycle four years, this in addition to the current investment of the FIFA Forward Program, which would go from the current 6 million to 9 million dollars.
• The increase in the global distribution of FIFA funds would contribute to reducing the income gap between the more and less developed countries, since FIFA is the only governing body that distributes its income worldwide.
• Holding the World Cup every two years would mean an increase of $ 80 billion in world GDP over a 16-year cycle and about a million jobs Worldwide.
• The revenue generated by the top five European leagues and the UEFA Champions League has increased steadily year over year, regardless of whether the main finals of national team tournaments overlap (i.e. the World Cup and the UEFA Champions League). Eurocup). In other words, scheduling relevant competitions for national teams does not detract from the income generated by international team and club competitions.
• The historical trajectory shows that there is no negative correlation between the income generated by the final stages of national team and club league tournaments. The empirical data collected in the last decade shows that, together, the percentage of growth in the revenues of the five main European leagues was higher in the seasons in which a major national team tournament was organized nationals with respect to others in which such tournaments were not held (42% compared to 26%).

(D)