fbpx

World Cup Every Two Years: Arguments For And Against

In May of this year, FIFA began to seriously consider the idea of holding a World Cup every two years, a proposal that has acquired more and more force with the passing of 2021.

Full soccer stadium

Having a World Cup every two years is frowned upon, but there are certain real benefits. Let's see some arguments for and against this controversial proposal. Photo: Pexels

LatinAmerican Post| Juan Manuel Londoño

Listen to this article


Leer en español: Mundial cada dos años: argumentos a favor y en contra

There is no lack of opponents to this World Cup every two years. UEFA, for example, has been adamant against holding a World Cup every two years. “Playing a month-long tournament every summer is deadly for the players. If it is every two years it collides with the Women's World Cup, with the Olympic football tournament [...] the value [of the World Cup] is precisely because it is every four years, you expect it, it is like the Olympic Games, it is a great event. I don't see our associations supporting it," said Aleksander Čeferin, UEFA president.

Having a World Cup every two years is frowned upon, but there are certainly real benefits. Let's see some arguments for and against this controversial proposal.

The positive side

It is undeniable that the entertainment provided by a soccer World Cup is almost unmatched in the world of sport. Few sponsors and media companies would refuse to hold a World Cup every two years, simply because of the number of eyes, it would attract.

There is also the fact that the World Cup is one of the main sources of income for FIFA. According to the same organization, 95% of its income comes from the sale of television rights, marketing, hotels, and licenses related to the FIFA World Cup.

In the same way, most of FIFA's expenses are based on developing football around the world. By 2022 alone, FIFA plans to spend $ 714 million on football development and education.

Thus, a World Cup every two years could contribute to increasing the education of referees, the development of women's football, and medical advances for athletes, among other useful things.

Also read: New Owners? The Arab World Took Over European Soccer

The downside

A strong argument against this proposal is that the importance of the event is reduced. Holding an event that is normally held every 4 years in 2 years can make it less relevant in the eyes of the public. This relevance can reduce the demand for the event, causing it to result in less money than before.

Another strong argument against it is based on the health of the players. With this change of proposal, at least in Europe, the players' schedule would be so tight that they would not have time to recover. This is not to mention that several footballers would spend more time away from their families, which would affect their mental health. A World Cup every two years could result in more injuries and games where the players are not 100%.