The new format of the World Cup, with 48 teams, expanded the number of participants and made the tournament more inclusive. On the other hand, it also opened discussions about the sporting balance of the competition.
In addition to criticisms related to heat, logistics and hydration stops, the regulation began to be questioned for creating situations in which performance on the field is not always sufficient to guarantee equivalent advantages.
The main one appears at the beginning of the knockout stage.
Not every leader is rewarded the same way
For the first time, the World Cup has 12 groups of four teams. The top two in each bracket advance, in addition to the eight best third-placed teams, forming a .
To accommodate, FIFA defined the knockout stage crosses in advance. In practice, this meant that some group leaders were destined to face third-placed teams, while others began to face second-placed leaders.
The result is a significant difference in the degree of difficulty between teams that performed the same in the group stage.
Brazil illustrates this scenario. After finishing at the top of their group, the team led by Carlo Ancelotti will face Japan, second in Group F and one of the most competitive teams in the tournament.
On other sides of the bracket, leaders face teams that advanced as third-placed, classified with just three or four points. In practice, winning the group no longer represents a uniform advantage.
Switching weighs as much as the campaign
In previous formats, the logic was simple: whoever had the best campaign, in theory, would find an opponent with a lower performance in the next phase.
In the 2026 World Cup, this relationship was weakened. As the crosses are already pre-determined, the path of a selection also depends on the group in which it fell in the draw, and not just on the results achieved on the field.
This means that two teams with practically identical campaigns can receive completely different rewards just for occupying different positions in the bracket.
This is a partial breach of the principle of sporting merit, as performance is no longer the only factor capable of defining the degree of difficulty of the knockout stage.
Better third parties also create competitive advantage
Another point that raises debate is the classification of the eight best third-placed teams.
As the groups close on different days, the teams that play in the last rounds already know exactly how many points, goal difference or goals scored they need to achieve to stay alive in the competition.
Whoever plays first, on the other hand, plays their game without this information and often needs to take bigger risks, without knowing whether they will really be necessary.
This difference in context can directly influence the teams’ strategy and creates a competitive advantage based on the competition calendar, and not just on technical quality.
Although the matches in the last round of each group take place simultaneously, the comparison between third placed teams takes place over several days, allowing teams from the final groups to enter the field with a much clearer scenario than those who played before.
The 2026 World Cup also debuted a change in the . With the priority of direct confrontation over goal difference, a team can be eliminated even with a higher goal score than a competitor, a change that also generated debate during the tournament.
Debate should follow the next editions
The expansion of the World Cup was a long-standing demand from FIFA to increase the representation of confederations and take more countries to the main world football tournament.
At the same time, the new format opened a debate about the extent to which the regulations can reward in a balanced way those who run the best campaign.
More than defining classifieds, the group stage began to distribute very different paths in the knockout stages. In a tournament decided by details, the scheduling, calendar and even the order of matches gained weight that, for many, reduces the exclusive influence of sporting merit in the title fight. With the format continuing for 2030, it is not possible to create a tournament mode that does not leave these gaps in the rankings.
