The 2026 World Cup group stage has largely failed to deliver the sense of jeopardy that made previous tournaments so compelling and unpredictable.
South Korea suffered a shock 1-0 defeat to South Africa on Wednesday, sending Bafana Bafana into the knockout stage for the first time in their history.
Despite that loss, South Korea remain very likely to progress as one of the eight best third-placed teams, holding three points and a goal difference of minus one.
Had the same result occurred at the 2022 World Cup, where only the top two sides in each group advanced, South Korea would have been eliminated immediately.
The inclusion of third-placed qualifiers was a structural necessity to ensure 32 teams reach the knockout rounds, but it has introduced uncomfortable incentives for teams to play for specific results.
Two fixtures this week present the clearest challenge yet to the integrity of the expanded format, raising serious questions about whether teams will simply settle for a draw.
Australia face Paraguay in Group D on Thursday, while Austria meet Algeria in Group J on Saturday, with all four sides sitting on three points apiece.
Four points is almost certain to be enough to claim one of the eight third-placed qualifying slots, which means a draw could suit all teams involved perfectly well.
The problem is not entirely new — Fifa experienced the consequences of unregulated scheduling at the 1982 World Cup, when West Germany faced Austria in the final standalone group game.
A narrow West Germany win would send both European sides through at Algeria’s expense, and the match duly finished 1-0 to the Germans, ending Algeria’s tournament.
Fifa responded by ensuring all final group fixtures are played simultaneously, a safeguard that works effectively in four-team groups but cannot eliminate the draw incentive created by the third-place qualification system.
There is an additional layer of complexity this week, as the fixtures assigned to third-placed qualifiers depend on which groups produce those teams, meaning later groups gain a significant informational advantage.
Austria and Algeria will complete their match knowing the full picture of the last 32, potentially putting them in a position where finishing third is actually more attractive than finishing second.
The runners-up in Group J will face the winners of Group H, where Spain currently sit top, whereas a third-placed finish could lead to a more favourable draw elsewhere.
Rather than playing for a draw, Austria might calculate that finishing third and avoiding a stronger second-round opponent is the shrewder piece of game management.
Bookmakers are clearly anticipating the possibility of cautious football, with the odds for Australia-Paraguay and Austria-Algeria both sitting close to even money for a draw.
History does show that teams do not always take the easy route when the opportunity presents itself, as Euro 2020 demonstrated when Austria beat Ukraine 1-0 in a match where a draw would have suited both sides.
There is also a weather-related concern, as Fifa has confirmed that if one group fixture is suspended due to lightning or storms, the other game in the group will not be halted alongside it.
That scenario could leave players returning to the pitch already knowing what result they need to secure qualification, which is an extraordinarily difficult situation for the sport to defend publicly.
If Australia-Paraguay and Austria-Algeria both end in draws, there will almost certainly be significant questions raised about the integrity of the tournament’s group stage structure.
Expanding the World Cup to 48 teams was central to the manifesto on which Gianni Infantino was elected Fifa president in 2016, and the current format is the direct consequence of that political decision.
