Fifa Club World Cup risks becoming Uefa Champions League 2.0

The Fifa Club World Cup has only served to underline the growing European monopoly in international competitions, with as many as seven Uefa teams potentially reaching the quarter-finals.

World football’s governing body had promoted the expanded tournament as a model of inclusivity. Yet, it has only reinforced club football’s entrenched power dynamics, as Europe’s elite prepare to dominate once again.

Uefa boasts 12 of the 32 competing teams, with the latter stages already resembling the Uefa Champions League knockout rounds. It feels like the deck is loaded in Europe’s favour — and Fifa appears unconcerned as long as the revenue keeps flowing.

But this continued dominance by European clubs undermines the competitive spirit of the tournament and threatens long-term credibility. Many critics fear that, unless reformed, the Club World Cup could become an irrelevant extension of existing European competitions.

Concerns over player welfare have also cast a shadow over the event. The timing of the tournament, during what is typically a rest period for most players, raises the risk of burnout. This has drawn criticism from clubs and players' unions alike.

The expected challenge from South American clubs has yet to materialise. Palmeiras were the only side from the continent to reach the last eight ahead of fellow Brazilians Fluminense's clash with AC Milan.

South American football continues to suffer from the steady drain of talent to Europe, a trend that has also weakened domestic leagues across Africa, Asia and the Americas. Young players are often recruited early and rarely feature for their local clubs at senior level. Europe reaps the rewards — the rest remain in development limbo.

For loyal fans of non-European giants, many of whom have packed out US stadiums and paid top dollar for tickets, what this means remains to be seen. The early elimination of MLS teams may dampen interest and affect attendance in the business end of the competition.

It also raises questions about the sustainability of Fifa’s selection model — already criticised for excluding high-profile clubs such as English champions Liverpool and Spanish heavyweights Barcelona.

Whether more European representation is what the tournament truly needs is up for debate. European depth allows multiple top-tier clubs to compete, while other confederations often send less competitive representatives. But should successful Uefa teams be punished for their strength?

With lucrative prize money on offer, clubs from smaller footballing nations will welcome the financial boost. However, unless that income is reinvested into player development and club infrastructure, the disparity will only grow.

Unfortunately, most of the money is likely to benefit club executives rather than fuel structural reform.

Possible solutions include revenue-sharing schemes, squad value parity rules, or player number caps, and even rotating host nations beyond traditional power bases. Yet few of these are likely to appeal to Fifa, who appear content with the status quo — and the financial windfall it brings.

Morocco, Spain and Brazil have all been touted as potential hosts for the next edition in four years, with Qatar also expressing interest — though a winter tournament would likely face fierce opposition from European clubs due to domestic calendar disruptions.

Unless structural changes are implemented, the Fifa Club World Cup will continue to serve as little more than an offshoot of the Uefa Champions League — a competition dressed up as global but ultimately rooted in European dominance.