Brian Glanville, the oldest British ‘football writers’, used to say: “Sepp Blatter has ten ideas a day, and eleven of them are badOne of those ideas, which the former FIFA president threw away like a handful of confetti quickly dispersed by the wind, was to change the frequency of the World Cup from four to two years. “I want a soccer world championship every two years“, he launched in January 1999.” The national teams will then be classified as they deserve. [La formule] existing one tournament every four years has expired. It dates back to the 1930s, when teams went from one continent to another by boat “.
The boat on which Blatter had himself embarked, proposing to end a quadrennial competition, disappeared without a trace. We believed. For now, twenty-three years later, he has reappeared from the mist where he was believed lost, with Arsène Wenger at the helm of this Marie-Céleste, under the benevolent gaze of Captain Gianni Infantino.
world Cup
Wenger details his plan for the World Cup, the European leagues oppose it
09/09/2021 At 1:30 PM
The World Cup every two years? “We go from caviar to the Big Mac”
The former Arsenal coach, became ‘FIFA World Football Development Director’ in November 2019, spoke on the subject for the first time in March 2021. “Is it reasonable“, he had said,”[…] to increase the number of trips for international breaks? […] We have to reorganize all this, regroup the international dates. One of the solutions is probably to organize the World Cup and the Euro every two years and stop everything else“. The subject was obviously close to his heart, since he returned to it frequently in the months that followed, the last time on September 3.”The principle would be a grouping of qualifications, every year“, he suggested,”and at the end of the season a big competition, World Cup or continental championship “. Obviously, this boat was not about to disappear on the horizon.
A path not necessarily paved with good intentions
There is no question here of discussing the merits of Wenger’s suggestion. Its role, after all, is also to open up debates within the football community, whether it be video assistance, the law of offside or the international calendar. But his insistence – and the timing of his interventions – make it necessary to wonder if his mission does not take on a completely different character in this specific case, without this necessarily calling into question the sincerity of his reflection.
The idea of a biennial World Cup has gained ground since last March, a path that is not necessarily paved with good intentions, and whose route reveals how much, in the football of 2021 and the FIFA of Gianni Infantino, everything, absolutely everything, acquires a political dimension, where one chooses his camp not with regard to the intrinsic value of the proposals and the common good, but of his own interest, in terms of power and money.
Arsène Wenger and Gianni Infantino
Credit: Getty Images
From this point of view, we have rarely seen such a diplomatic ballet within the bodies of world football, not even when the wet Super League firecracker fizzled out in the space of less than a week last April, a ballet whose choreographer is none other than the president of Fifa himself.
Everyone went there from their positions, often contradictory, sometimes almost belligerent. AFC, CAF, UEFA, CONMEBOL, ECA, FIFPro, European Leagues, federations, Fifa ‘legends’, all have spoken and will continue to do so in the coming months, months which “are shaping up to be very tense” , according to the secretary-general of FIFPro – the world union of professional players – Jonas Baer-Hoffmann who, addressing a group of journalists this Wednesday (among which Eurosport was represented), had even spoken of the risk that we will reach a “breaking point” in world football if a real dialogue is not established between all parties.
The supporters don’t want it? So what ?
The fans? Fifa today released an outline of an online survey of 15,000 people “identified as having an interest in football“which, surprise, surprise, suggests that the majority of them are in favor of, surprise, surprise, holding the World Cup … every two years. The least we can say is that these firsts The conclusions (further studies are in progress) are likely to be greeted with a certain skepticism in the world of supporterism, which is fiercely opposed to this reform. In any case, the fans had been asked for their opinion when it was a question of increasing the number of nations present at a World Cup to forty-eight, as will be the case from 2026? Does this mean that we must already resign ourselves to the prospect of a biennial World Cup, because what Fifa wants, Fifa gets?
The answer is no. The resistance has been organized since the Saudi federation, with which FIFA has the most friendly relations, proposed, on its own or another, that a ‘feasibility study’ be carried out for a Biennial World Cup at the 71st Fifa Congress last May. The proposal, which Gianni Infantino then described as’ detailed and eloquent ‘, was then ratified by 166 of the delegates, only 22 speaking against the Saudis’ motion.
The tactic was nothing new, and is even a familiar tool at the disposal of the great powers: to pass a measure that may be unpopular, start by asking someone else to propose it; however, there was no shortage of candidates to speak the good word. The vanguard of the Fifa offensive was the Executive Committee of the African Confederation, CAF, whose new president Patrice Motsepe is a close ally of the president of Fifa, who announced its support for a reform of the frequency of the World Cup from July 16.
Gianni Infantino
Credit: Getty Images
Twice as many World Cups, that’s almost twice as much revenue for Fifa
Several ‘legends’ of Fifa, this group of former players with whom Gianni Infantino likes to be accompanied – especially when he has a message to convey – took turns to support the project of a World Cup every two years during ‘a recent visit to Doha. Peter Schmeichel, Gary Cahill, Ronaldo ‘fenomeno’ and others have touted the merits of the proposal. The CFU, which brings together the Caribbean federations, did the same on September 12, which prompted a seasoned observer of the region to say that the members of this association, 27 of whom have the right to vote in the Fifa Congress, “would bark while jumping on one leg if they thought this is what Infantino wantsFour Asian federations (Nepal, Bangladesh, Maldives and Sri Lanka) had preceded them by eleven days. Mexico and Costa Rica hinted that the idea did not displease them.
The attitude of these national associations is understandable. Twice as many World Cups is almost twice as much income for Fifa, more than 90% of which derives from its biggest tournament, income of which a substantial part is redistributed to the 211 members of the organization. In the current context, when the pandemic has drained the resources of so many federations that depend on the Zurich manna, who would say no to seeing it being doubled? But CAF, alone, ‘weighs’ 54 votes, when 106 would be enough to endorse the passage to a biennial World by the Fifa Congress. Plus 27 for CFU, plus Saudi Arabia, Nepal …
A formality, then? Far from there. What we are witnessing is the opening of a new front in the fight between Fifa and the two Confederations which have monopolized the title since the first World Cup was held in Uruguay in 1930: UEFA and its main one. ally, the South American CONMEBOL (which aligned itself with the European position after having supported a biennial World Cup). Also, when UEFA President Aleksander Čeferin raises the specter of a possible boycott of the World Cup by the European and South American football giants (and what would prevent them from organizing their own tournament, exactly?), and that the ECA and all the major championships, without exception, make known their absolute opposition to the project, that gives food for thought.
Gianni Infantino and Aleksander Ceferin during a soccer match
Credit: Getty Images
Ceferin’s threat that changes everything
And ponder is exactly what the avowed supporters of this fundamental calendar overhaul are doing today. Their tone has changed a lot in the past few days – since, in fact, Čeferin launched his boycott threat. in an interview with The Times. CAF backed down. She no longer talks about her support for a World Cup organized every twenty-four months, no. She “is of the opinion that at this stage, the most important thing is that discussions and deliberations continue to take place in an open manner and with the objective of doing what is in the best interest of all Member Associations, confederations, football players and other stakeholders around the world“.
It is far from the same. The AFC, the Asian confederation (47 members, 47 voters), of which Nepal and its friends belong, “welcomes the extensive consultation process initiated and guided by FIFA to examine options for optimizing the international calendar“. But not more.
Also, when we speak of ‘war’ in world football, between Fifa and its allies on the one hand, and the UEFA-CONMEBOL axis on the other, should we specify that this is a war of position, even a strange war. We launched a few flares. But the offensive, the real one, will still wait.
