FIFA still plans to play for Iran at the 2026 World Cup.
Despite suggestions that Italy could replace them, the situation is reaching a deeper level of politics.
Although the US-Iran conflict is still unresolved, US presidential envoy Paolo Zampoli confirmed to the Financial Times that he pitched the idea of the four-time winners to both Donald Trump and FIFA president Gianni Infantino.
“I’m Italian, and it would be a dream to see the Azzurri at an American-hosted tournament,” Zampolli said. “With four titles, they have the pedigree to justify inclusion.”
Several football sources have privately dismissed the idea as “rubbish” and “never going to happen.”.
The main reason is to keep Iran in as long as possible. If the conflict eventually made the situation untenable, however, it would be considered absurd for FIFA to drop another country of its choice unconnected to Iran in qualification. The governing body may even open itself up to claims at the Court of Arbitration for Sport. For example, there would be no valid reason for Italy to choose Iran instead of Ireland or Wales, despite history.
Most football administrators see Iran as the fairest way to replace them, as they give the next team a possible place in their Asian qualification process. The United Arab Emirates finished third in their respective qualification group, just missing out on direct qualification. The decision will essentially eliminate Iran’s presence from this campaign, leaving only the remaining teams in the table.
There is also a footballing precedent for how Denmark famously won the Euro 92 competition in place of banned Yugoslavia.
It was UEFA’s competition rather than FIFA’s, however, which raises two issues for Infantino in this situation.
One is that FIFA has “no set rules” for changing teams at the World Cup, according to a senior source. free. The current rules only state that the governing body has “full discretion” about what happens if a team is expelled or withdrawn, with Article 6 of the World Cup’s regulations noting that one option is to “replace a member association with another association.”
Such a vague description opens up a range of possible solutions that many interested parties are naturally hoping to influence. Among the ideas that have been floated is another mini-playoff in June, with candidates eliminated from the March playoffs drawn from a hat.
FIFA discussed possible contingency plans last month, but there is still no firm roadmap.
Infantino nevertheless plans to be there in Iran, having made a trip to meet the national team last month.
His presence is due to his desire to give the impression of a World Cup going smoothly, his desire to avoid the unprecedented modern situation of a team actually withdrawing, and Infantino’s own grandiose ideas about football “uniting the world.” He will be considered politically powerful for Iran after all. Many also wonder if Infantino may eventually aspire to his Nobel Peace Prize, as his predecessor Sepp Blatter suspected.
The traction Zampolli’s advice has gained, however, has highlighted another problem for Infantino: the political pressure his organisation has willingly brought upon itself.
Much has been made of the Swiss official’s relationship with Trump—symbolized by FIFA’s own mocking of the new peace prize— and there has long been a sense that it is complicating the body’s navigation of geopolitical affairs.
One reason organisations such as FIFA and UEFA are apolitical in their rules is so that they can respond impartially to geopolitical developments if and when they affect football. Infantino’s closeness to Trump is seen as influencing him nonetheless, largely because he would rather not upset the US president ahead of a logistically complex World Cup, where any decision by the administration could lead to chaos.
The reluctance to discuss strategy on Iran is consistent with Infantino’s approach, as much of it hinges on US policy, which he does not wish to terminate.
It also means the FIFA president has to give credence to people close to Trump – such as Zampoli.
However, there are currently no plans to replace Iran with Italy.
The problem is that there is still no concrete plan for Iran, except to hope for the best.
