Why is FIFA's continued use of a flawed seeded draw system in its competitions represent a betrayal of the game's ideals?

The recent FIFA Club World Cup draw, conducted in Miami, USA, has once again spotlighted the glaring flaws in FIFA’s seeding system, reigniting debates about its fairness and integrity. While FIFA champions values like equality, solidarity, and fair play, its reliance on a seeding framework that contradicts these ideals undermines its credibility and raises serious questions about its commitment to using football as a unifying global force.

At the core of this issue is a system that perpetuates inequality, favouring teams from Europe and South America at the expense of others. Historically, FIFA structured its tournaments to ensure preferential placements for these regions, initially through officials' subjective decisions and later through rankings-based methodologies. Yet, the outcomes remain unchanged. FIFA's latest return to a discretionary seeding model—justified by vague criteria such as "merit, competitive balance, and regional diversity"—reveals an entrenched bias that prioritizes traditional powerhouses over fair competition.

People do not merely perceive this bias; they observe it. Research has shown that being seeded in FIFA tournaments significantly increases a team's chances of advancing to later stages. For instance, Monks, Jared, James, and Husch (2009) found that seeding in the FIFA World Cup increases a team's probability of reaching the quarterfinals by 26%. Our analysis confirms this, as Tables 1 and 2 below show, that the countries that have the longest run of matches without encountering the best teams in the tournament reflect a pattern of bias. Africans and Asians appear on the list whose path is front-loaded with the toughest matches earlier on.? In the coming FIFA Club World Cup, the pattern of structural favouritism is evident. European and South American teams are the only ones seeded and will enjoy easier paths to the latter stages, shielded from facing top-tier opponents early on. In contrast, clubs from Africa, Asia, and other regions face disproportionately tougher routes, often encountering formidable opponents in the initial rounds. This is no coincidence; it is a system deliberately designed to benefit the elite

The disparity creates two parallel competitions within the same tournament: one for the privileged few and another for teams forced to navigate a gauntlet of challenges. This separation fundamentally undermines the meritocratic ideal that should define global sporting events. Consider clubs like South Africa's Mamelodi Sundowns or Saudi Arabia's Al Hilal. To win the tournament, they would likely need to overcome five of the best teams, while European giants like Real Madrid or Bayern Munich might face only two such challenges. On average, non-European and non-South American teams encounter two top-tier opponents by their fourth match, whereas European teams typically avoid such tests until the quarterfinals. Morocco's historic run in the 2022 FIFA World Cup starkly illustrated this structural imbalance. To win, Morocco would have needed to defeat five top-10 opponents—a feat no team has ever faced in the tournament's 92-year history. In contrast, as Diagram 1 below shows, none of the previous nine champions have ever faced more than two such opponents. This is not an anomaly but a rule, a design that blatantly contradicts the essence of sport.

A more equitable alternative is not only possible but essential. To uphold the values of fairness and inclusion, FIFA must adopt a genuinely merit-based seeding system. In tournaments like the Club World Cup—where a global ranking system for clubs does not yet exist—a logical approach would be to seed continental champions and the host representative while placing all other teams in a single pot. This method would maintain regional diversity without granting undue advantages. Such a system is not unprecedented; the FA Cup, the world's oldest and most respected football competition, employs an open draw that treats all participants equally. The competition does not guarantee an easy path, whether a team is a non-league underdog or Arsenal, the competition's most successful club. Despite this egalitarian approach, the FA Cup has retained its prestige and charm for over 150 years.

FIFA’s current seeding system also raises broader concerns about its role as the steward of global football. By clinging to a structure that disproportionately benefits European and South American teams, FIFA risks alienating fans and players from underrepresented regions like Africa and Asia. These regions deserve tournaments that value their contributions and potential equally. The credibility of FIFA’s competitions hinges on its willingness to confront these issues and implement meaningful reforms.

Furthermore, FIFA's allocation of economic resources exacerbates the inequities. Diagram 2 highlights the disproportionate distribution of pre-tournament preparation funds, with 52% allocated to Europe and South America—regions that comprise only a third of FIFA's membership. Equitable distribution of funds based on regional membership would give significantly larger shares to Africa and Asia. Diagram 3 further exposes the arbitrary nature of these allocations, which contradict FIFA's claims of competitive balance, meritocracy, and regional diversity. Notably, South America, despite being less dominant than Europe, receives the highest proportional over-allocation. Meanwhile, Africa, a region that excels in various football metrics, receives the lowest allocation. This disparity underscores the systemic bias that permeates FIFA's operations.

"Football's power and global appeal entails a considerable degree of responsibility. A commitment to safeguarding the values that make the game fascinating in the first place, and without which its greatness would be at risk". -FIFA Vision Statement. This a powerful statement that should serve as a constant reminder that they run the game on behalf of the billion who call this their game. The practices described here are inconsistent with the considerable degree of responsibility that football and those charged with the responsibility to steward it holds.

The coin toss at every key stage of a football match represents a powerful reminder that the founding fathers intended for no one to get undue privilege football and ensure cannot co-exist with acts and practices that remove fair and equal opportunity for all. The current format and application of seeding, while perhaps well-intentioned, has created an unacceptable conflict with the game's fundamental principles, and we must eliminate it.

In conclusion, FIFA celebrated its 120th anniversary this year; seven European nations formed it in 1904. The world was very different, with many of its 211 members today having no voice or seat on the table as colonies of some of the world powers. The idea that in 2024 with seats around the table Africa and Asia, other developing football regions and 71% of the FIFA base must still fight for fairness, solidarity, justice and equality is unacceptable in football. The time has come for the organization to truly reform and align its vision with its practices and actions. Only then will FIFA's tournaments achieve their promise as the pinnacle of global football—a stage where merit, not preordination or engineering, determines success and achievement.

?