In previous versions, the path was clearer for the audience. The round of groups, then the round of 16, after which the usual calculations begin. In the 2026 edition, the picture has changed. The tournament expanded to 48 teams, divided into 12 groups, with the first and second placed teams from each group qualifying, in addition to the eight best third-placed teams. Thus, a new round was born: the Round of 32.
This change gave the tournament a wider scope. More teams participated, new football markets arrived, and many fans found themselves interested in the World Cup for a longer period. For FIFA, the idea is clear: make the World Cup more inclusive, opening the door to countries that would not normally have a chance to appear in the biggest tournament.
But the sporting question still remains: Did this system make the World Cup more exciting, or more complex?
In terms of excitement, it is difficult to deny that the new system has given the small and medium-sized teams more hope. Even third place no longer means automatic exit. This made some matches in the third round of the group stage more sensitive, because the calculations were no longer limited to first place and second place only, but rather extended to goal difference, the number of goals scored, and the ranking of the third-place finishers.
This is precisely where the new face of the World Cup appeared. A team may lose a match, draw another, and then find itself still having a chance. Another team may finish its matches in third place, but it remains waiting for the results of other groups to know its fate. These calculations added tension, and made the waits and points more exciting.
The opening of the Round of 32 between South Africa and Canada carries special symbolism. The match does not appear to be just an ordinary elimination confrontation, but rather the beginning of a new phase in the history of the World Cup. From now on, the path to the title no longer actually begins from the round of 16, but rather from a broader station, which increases the number of matches and prolongs the teams’ journey towards the final. This expansion may also serve the major teams. The presence of an additional round gives it an opportunity to gradually enter the atmosphere of decisiveness, but in return it adds a match that cannot tolerate mistakes, as one bad match may end the career of a team that was nominated to go far.
As for the lesser-known teams, they may find a historic opportunity in the round of 32. Reaching this role in itself could turn into an achievement, and winning it could open the door to a big football story. But the other side of the picture cannot be ignored. Too many matches may exhaust the players, increase pressure on the teams, and make the tournament longer and more crowded. The new system may also confuse observers, especially during the stage of determining the best third-place finishers. Mathematical justice here becomes a subject of debate: Are all groups equal in power? Is it fair for a third team from an easy group to qualify at the expense of a third team from a more difficult group?
These questions will accompany the 2026 edition until its end. If the round of 32 witnessed strong matches and big surprises, it will be said that the new system succeeded in raising the level of excitement. However, if unbalanced matches appear or some calculations seem more complicated than necessary, the debate will return as to whether the expansion actually served the tournament or made it “unfair.”
