Wednesday 1st July 2026. Each Wednesday, at around 2.30pm, I talk to Sonya McLauchlan on Track Radio about technology and sport. This week it’s a bit more mathsy than normal as we talk about the FIFA World Cup and the effect of FIFA’s increase in the number of teams from 32 to 48.

Why did FIFA do it? What effect did this have and has it ruined the tournament?

FIFA’s rationale

It’s hard not to think that all FIFA wants to do is squeeze as much money out of the tournament as they can. There are now 104 games rather than 64, representing a potential 62.5% increase in income (even before dynamic pricing). There’s also a bit of politics going on too: help lower ranked teams to get to the world cup finals and maybe they’ll vote for you when the next election takes place.

But what about the actual sport, arguably the most important bit? If the number of teams in the group stages increases, then the ranking of the teams must surely decrease and the competitive nature of the tournament will suffer.

Now that the group stages are over, is this what happened?

Team rankings

Back in 2022, the rankings of the teams that qualified for the tournament went from Brazil ranked 1st down to Ghana, ranked 61st. Ordering teams from best to worst ranking, the teams in the middle were Senegal and Wales, ranked 18th and 19th.

In 2026, the teams went from Argentina now ranked 1st down to New Zealand, ranked 85th. The teams in the middle this time were Australia and Algeria, ranked 27th and 28th. It’s clear, then, that the overall ranking of the teams has dropped in the middle by about 9 ranking places and by 24 places at the bottom. Importantly, seven teams had lower rankings than the lowest in 2022.

Effect on goals scored

In 2022 there were 2.5 goals per match; this year is was 3 per match, an increase of a goal every two matches.  This could have been due to a number of things. Perhaps a more attacking style at the tournament? Or maybe better teams scoring more goals against weaker ones?

Have the games become less competitive?

It’s possible that the increase in goals scored is because of a decrease in competitiveness at the tournament.

‘Competitiveness’ is tricky to measure. You’ll not be surprised to hear that there are nerds out there who think about this sort of thing all the time. A common methodology is called ELO: no, not Jeff Lynn’s fantastically successful band, but a method devised by chess master and physicist Arpad Elo to quantify skill in chess and use it for ranking. FIFA use a version of this they call SUM.

ELO is a little complicated for a short blog: if you want to go there, read a great series of articles by economics experts at the Economics Observatory. If you want a quick and dirty approach, stay here (and listen to real economists howl with derision).

Use this trick to work out competitiveness in a league

A trick I’ve always used when perusing tables in the group stages is to add up the total number of points in the table. In a league of four teams, there are six games. If there is a lack of competitiveness between the teams, then the higher ranked team will win every time and there will be six wins in all and a total of 18 points. This happened in France’s group, Group I.

The opposite, where there is absolute competition, is where teams cancel each other out and every game is a draw. In this case, the total number of points is 12 (remember that each team gets a point each so the total number of points handed out in a draw is two). I couldn’t find an instance in any FIFA world cup where this happened, although England got close in 1990 when their table had only one win (England 1, Egypt 0) and the other five games were draws. (England not competitive? Who’d have thought).

The two least competitive groups this year were Groups G and H with four draws and just two wins, giving 14 points in total.

How does this compare with the world cup in 2022?

In 2022, every group had four or five wins giving either 16 or 17 points. This year, nine of the 12 tables also had four or five wins but, as we’ve seen, two had just two wins and four draws (14 points) and one had six wins (18 points).

It seems, then, that the consequence of going to 48 teams is that the group outcome is much more variable.

Has this helped lower ranked teams?

We are now in the round of 32 with the same number of teams as at the start of the world cup in 2022. How do the rankings of the teams compare? The rankings go now from Argentina in 1st down to Ghana in 73rd. Back in 2022, the lowest ranked team 61 (by coincidence, Ghana). In this year’s remaining 32, we have three teams left with lower rankings: Bosnia-Herzogovina (64th), Cape Verde (67th) and Ghana (73rd).

The answer then, is yes: the new format has allowed lower ranked teams to progress.

What is likely to happen in the knockout stages?

History and statistics tell us that these lower ranked teams are unlikely to progress much further. The Economics Observatory gives the chances of progression for Bosnia-Herzogovina, Cape Verde and Ghana as being pretty minimal. A final with teams from Europe or South America seems pretty certain.

Is FIFA’s new format a success?

From FIFA’s point of view, it’s probably been seen as a success. The average number of goals has increased; seven teams at the tournament were ranked lower than the lowest in Qatar; three have progressed to the round of 32.

This seems a pretty good outcome for these countries that would have had little chance previously of reaching the knockout stages of the world cup. And the massive increase in the number of matches gives FIFA plenty of money to splash around lower ranked countries, and potential future votes to count upon.

Just don’t mention the hydration breaks.

1st July 2026.