World Cup 2026: Buildup to blockbuster semi-finals, Infantino hints at 64-team expansion – live

Key events

2h ago

Preamble

They’ve been getting into it in North Maluku, Indonesia.

“How was Wimbledon duty?” begins Krishnamoorthy V. “Welcome back. Do you think any of Spain/England/Argentina stop the current French team? And regarding 64 teams, I am saying let us get back to 24. More is not always merrier.”

Wimblewdon is always a joy, thanks – though I did my our World Cup. I’m afraid there’s no chance of a return to 24 teams, but I think that’d leave us with one of the problems we have now: third-placed teams qualifying from the group. The optimal number for a sensibly functioning tournament is 32, but that isn’t enough, I don’t think – the break-up of communist Europe is one reason, but also, our Euro-centric focus has changed and we need more countries from everywhere else too.

As far as beating France goes, I think Spain have the best chance, especially with Rodri looking more like his pre-injury self, but they need more from Lamine Yamal, who still doesn’t look fully fit.

England have the players to out-run France in midfield, but I think their defence would eventually let them down, while I don’t think Argentina have much hope because they don’t have enough in that part of the pitch.

I’m pretty sure this one will blow over. Both Thomas Tuchel and Jude Bellingham are serious professionals who want to win more than they want to fall out and who need each other more than they need to fall out. Both said what they said during a moment of high emotion and relief; I’d be surprised if they weren’t cool again already, if there was even a short time when they weren’t.

I mean, just look at him.

In which regard, here are some words on the great man.

I guess I can accept that, for some, Lionel Messi is the greatest of all time – his consistency and longevity are unparalleled – but I’m not sure it’s possible to hit a higher level than Diego did during that month, then during the following season when he led Napoli to their first scudetto.

Goodness me, what a fixture this is. Mexico 86 was my debut World Cup and a significant part of me is still there. I remember when Diego scored his second goal, Bazza cried “And you’ve got to say that’s magnificent,” and seven-year-old me squeaked “that’s better than magnificent”.

What I didn’t realise at the time was that I was being given a false impression of what is possible in football: I thought one bloke running around everyone on the other team between him and goal was something that could happen, but it turned out that it’s only possible with Diego. No one has done more to disprove the truism that football is a team game.

Back to the pub piece, it’s great that businesses are getting a boost. The problem, though, is what happens afterwards.

Not all pubs are enjoying a football bonanza, however. Steve Hopkins, owner of the Shovel Inn in Stourbridge, where Bellingham was born, is quitting the business after the tournament.

He said: “I’ve been in pubs for six World Cups. Most have been fantastic for trade but for this one turnout has been poor. People are staying away from boozers or only coming to them at the last minute. Whereas in the past the pub would be full at 3pm or 4pm for an 8pm kickoff. You’re talking about doubling your trade while the World Cup was on.

“Ever since Covid, people have been staying at home, it’s a different way of life now. I’ve run pubs since I was 18, and I’m now 64, and I’m glad I’m getting out.

“This is a semi-final and for once it’s on at good time of the night for it. People usually want the atmosphere at the pub to share the experience, because you can’t get that at home. If I don’t get a really good turnout that would just sum it up.”

For the Shovel Inn, a good night’s takings would be about £3,000. Hopkins said: “If I get a grand on Wednesday I’ll be doing well.”

Email! “While not a fan of Fifa’s blatant attempts to change the World Cup solely to make more money,” writes Ryan, “I’m actually not against the idea of going to 64 teams. The quality difference between no 48 and no 64 in the world rankings is not that large on paper, so I don’t see that it would significantly dilute the quality of the tournament. It also presents an advantage that we can move back to a system where only the top two teams go through from each group, which creates greater jeopardy and hopefully more exciting matches in the group stages.”

I agree. Instinctively, it feels wrong, but practically it might well be right. I would, though, like to know more about the logistics, as we don’t want a situation where only a few countries have the infrastructure required to host.

I must say I’m torn. Of course, I’m prejudiced against it simply by virtue of Infantino wanting it, but I can’t deny that expanded competitions – in the Euros too – give us something different, countries otherwise excluded enriching the experience. Moreover, were we to go to 64, we’d be rid of the third-place qualification situation, which allows teams to move on having beaten the worst side in their group and no more; we’d no longer play 72 matches to lose just 16 teams. Or, in other words, an expanded field is cleaner – though qualification would be even more tedious than before, and I wonder how, infrastructurally, any host would be able to facilitate so many teams, not just in terms of grounds, but hotels, training facilities, media and so on.

Let’s start with Infantino latest:

How do we feel about this?

Preamble

Hello there one and all and welcome to day one of our final World Cup week!

Yes, we’re in the middle of a trying 63-hour run of no actual football, but together we’ll get through it – I promise.

So let’s spend today reflecting on what we’ve seen, considering what we’re going to see, and generally discussing all things Beautiful GameTM.

Let’s go!