More games, more controversy: The good and bad of the biggest World

FIFA president Gianni Infantino promised the 2026 World Cup would be the "biggest event in the history of mankind," likening the tournament in the United States, Mexico and Canada to 104 Super Bowls in one month. As the dust settles on the expanded 48-team tournament, the question remains: did it live up to the hype?

Expansion: More teams, more stories

For the first time, the World Cup featured 48 teams, with Curacao, Cape Verde, Jordan and Uzbekistan making their debuts. The group stage, which expanded to 72 matches — more than an entire World Cup used to have — saw only 16 teams eliminated. Critics argued that the quality was diluted, but the tournament delivered compelling storylines.

Cape Verde, a tiny archipelago in the Atlantic Ocean with just 530,000 people, claimed incredible draws against Spain and Uruguay (and Saudi Arabia) to finish second in their group. Curacao shrugged off a 7-1 thrashing by Germany to earn a shock point against Ecuador. DR Congo drew with Portugal and advanced from their group. Without these debutants, the group stage would have been dull, with major nations making light work of the competition.

However, the expanded format had its drawbacks. FIFA used head-to-head over goal difference as the first tie-breaker, and with eight third-placed teams advancing, matches like Australia-Paraguay and Austria-Algeria saw both teams settle for draws knowing they would both qualify. The drama only truly began in the knockout rounds, with Cape Verde taking Argentina to extra time before losing 3-2. The African nation avoided defeat in 90 minutes against both World Cup finalists.

Seeding controversy: Protecting the top four

FIFA introduced a new seeding policy to prevent the top-four ranked countries — Argentina, England, France and Spain — from meeting early in the knockout rounds. They were given special status to be drawn into separate quarters of the draw. In practice, the groups kept them apart until the semi-finals anyway, and all four reached the last four for the first time. However, FIFA went further: to ensure the top two ranked teams, Argentina and Spain, could not meet until the final, they swapped Argentina into Group J and France into Group I. Without the swap, England would have faced France in the semi-finals, with Argentina taking on Spain — making an Argentina-Spain final impossible.

Hydration breaks: A cash cow for broadcasters

Mandatory three-minute hydration breaks were introduced in every match, regardless of conditions, ostensibly for player welfare. FIFA insisted on sporting integrity, applying them equally even in air-conditioned stadiums in Atlanta, Dallas, Houston and Vancouver. Critics noted that the breaks enabled broadcasters to cash in with commercials, turning a welfare measure into a revenue stream.

Politics and controversy

The politicisation of the World Cup began before the tournament, with visa issues and Iran's participation drawing scrutiny. US President Donald Trump intervened to get Florian Balogun's red card overturned. High ticket prices sparked controversy, though it remains unclear whether they kept fans away. Pierluigi Collina, FIFA's head of referees, waged war on time-wasting and pushed through a raft of law changes, but their real impact is debated.

Infantino's vision of a "biggest event in the history of mankind" may have been hyperbolic, but the 2026 World Cup undeniably delivered memorable moments, new storylines, and plenty of debate — for better or worse.