FIFA Series: Is FIFA’s New International Project Worthwhile?

By: Anthony Tazbaz

Image Credit: Vishal Butolia

Those who follow and support international football may have something that they can look forward to!

On February 26, Reuters published an article on FIFA’s plans to create a new project/tournament — FIFA Series — whereby national teams would play in a series of matches in one country during an international window. This project is designed to provide nations an opportunity to play against nations from other confederations, which tend to occur less frequently due to the recent establishment of the Nations League in several confederations.

FIFA Series, a New FIFA Endeavour

The FIFA Series pilot project will kick off in four nations during the March 2024 international window. These nations include one in Africa (Algeria), one in Europe (Azerbaijan) and two in Asia (Saudi Arabia and Sri Lanka). The nations’ football federations will take responsibility for the tournament’s organization, whereas FIFA will facilitate the tournaments. Against this backdrop, according to FIFA Regional Member Associations Director for Europe Elkhan Mammadov, FIFA will invite member associations with their own sponsors to sponsor the tournament.

So far, 20 nations will participate in the expansion edition of FIFA Series: four in each of the three tournaments located in Algeria, Azerbaijan and Sri Lanka and eight in Saudi Arabia. FIFA will cover travel costs for participating nations. Interestingly, however, the hosts may not necessarily compete in this competition. For instance, Saudi Arabia will not participate in this competition, despite hosting two groups of four teams. However, other national teams will reap the benefits of Saudi Arabia’s most prestigious venues and the fans’ support.

Who Will Participate?

The participating nations in the tournament are indicated below, based on the location of the tournament (with their February 2024 FIFA Men’s World Rankings, out of 210 nations):

🇩🇿 Algeria

• 🇩🇿 Algeria (43)

• 🇦🇩 Andorra (164)

• 🇧🇴 Bolivia (86)

• 🇿🇦 South Africa (58)

🇦🇿 Azerbaijan

• 🇦🇿 Azerbaijan (113)

• 🇧🇬 Bulgaria (83)

• 🇲🇳 Mongolia (190)

• 🇹🇿 Tanzania (119)

🇸🇦 Saudi Arabia

Group A

• 🇰🇭 Cambodia (179)

• 🇨🇻 Cape Verde (65)

• 🇬🇶 Equatorial Guinea (79)

• 🇬🇾 Guyana (157)

Group B

• 🇧🇲 Bermuda (171)

• 🇧🇳 Brunei (194)

• 🇬🇳 Guinea (76)

• 🇻🇺 Vanuatu (170)

🇱🇰 Sri Lanka

• 🇱🇰 Sri Lanka (204)

• 🇧🇹 Bhutan (184)

• 🇨🇫 Central African Republic (CAR) (129)

• 🇵🇬 Papua New Guinea (165)

As indicated above, the inaugural edition of the FIFA Series will consist of mostly lower-ranked nations, with Algeria being the only nation in the first quartile and to participate frequently in the FIFA World Cup; several of these nations, including hosts Azerbaijan and Sri Lanka, never made an appearance at the World Cup.

Out of the 20 participating nations, only seven nations were ranked among the top 100 in the February 2024 FIFA Men’s World Rankings. Nine out of the 13 nations below the top-100 were ranked in the bottom quartile (~157-210), with hosts Sri Lanka ranked lowest at 204 out of 210 nations.

Will This Competition Prove Helpful?

This new project could be a boon for FIFA and football on the global stage particularly among the smaller nations that have failed historically to qualify for major tournaments. For example, players from Asian nations like Bhutan and Cambodia — where players tend to play in local leagues and only in the preliminary stages of the international tournaments’ qualifiers — will not only gain additional experience, but also be able to immerse themselves into understanding how football differentiates between nations from Africa and North America. The same can be said about nations like Guyana or CAR, who experience identical challenges in their respective confederations.

Moreover, the success of these tournaments could open the door for higher-ranked nations to participate in these tournaments. This could result in higher revenues for host nations and for participating nations should it become a competitive tournament. Ultimately, converting these tournaments into a competitive competition for money and silverware — albeit a minor prize compared to competitions like the Euro or Copa América — could be incredibly beneficial financially and for national pride, especially for lower-ranked nations that play against similarly ranked counterparts.

In essence, the revenue could boost nations’ football infrastructure — such as academies, venues, scouting and player development — whereas silverware could ignite or boost a feeling of pride and patriotism among supporters of their national teams, which could in turn grow the game in the medium- to long-term and create a positive impact for incoming generations.

However, there are a couple of concerns/questions regarding this new competition. First, with FIFA merely facilitating the tournament, will host nations be able to accommodate such a tournament?

So far, the answer would be likely a yes, particularly due to the competitions consisting of 4 nations only, with the exception of Saudi Arabia and their capabilities to host a total of eight teams. As the competition grows, nations will have sufficient time to consider hosting a cohort of national teams and boost their infrastructure, such as enhancing their stadiums and city infrastructure. Ultimately, host nations — particularly most lower-ranked nations — would need to enact and exercise sound fiscal policies and practices, respectively, and understand the financial and perhaps infrastructural limitations facing the nation, particularly in the planned host city or cities.

Second, should this tournament become a competitive competition, would this constitute too many competitive matches for players, particularly from higher-ranked nations that would join the competition?

It may pose challenge for players who want to maximize the amount of matches available to play, especially when pursuing international records for their country, from scoring to appearances and wins. However, players could also sit out for the competition, especially if it were held during the November or March windows, during which league play is in full swing and UEFA competitions enter the business end of things, particularly the end of the group stages and the beginning of the knockout stages.

Despite this, there may lie a compromise. During these windows, nations should explore the option of creating A and B teams, whereby one roster competes in this competition and the other plays international friendlies, which remain desirable for many. With participation in these tournaments contingent on invitation — not qualification — highly-ranked nations may feel less compelled to play their best players for the sake of prestige and bragging rights.

In addition, he two-team approach would allow players who may not have a strong chance at getting called up to not only obtain a rare international cap, but also play in a competitive match for their nation. This would also provide agency for star players, who could opt for either roster and series of matches while still pursuing national team records. It is ultimately time for star players, particularly those who lamented the increasing number of matches or competing in the UEFA Nations League (to which they have a point to a certain extent) to take executive decisions without facing significant repercussions, both performance-related and disciplinary.

Overall, this competition could provide strong growth to countries’ football infrastructure at a lower cost than one hosting a major competition, as well as enhance the development of players who may not obtain the same opportunity, solely based on where they live. The FIFA Series could be paramount to football’s aim at providing an equality of opportunities and (relative) fortune and glory for those who crave the beautiful game.