In the battle of attrition which begins around the overhaul of the international calendar, Fifa has decided to send all its troops to the front line. After several days of frantic lobbying by Wenger and company to pass the idea of a World Cup every two years “in the interest of the players and the spectators” (and especially not that of Gianni Infantino, who would see the income of his institution to double quietly), let’s go for a new stage of the bombardment: an official poll published on Thursday, who asserts that a “majority of supporters are in favor of an increase in the frequency of the World Cup”. 55% against 45%, precisely.
A surprising finding when we know the recent sling of many associations of supporters about this absurd idea of having a big competition every summer, but so be it. 20 minutes has nevertheless decided to take a closer look at the springs of this famous survey, and its methodology.
Who was interviewed, and by whom?
FIFA specifies that this is a study carried out by Iris (Intelligent research in sponsoring) a recognized consulting agency, in partnership with YouGov, a panel supplier, “as part of the market study on the feasibility of a biennialization of the World Cup ”. 23,225 people from all over the world (we will come back to this) returned a questionnaire via the Internet, of which 15,008 were selected because they “expressed an interest in football and the World Cup”.
How were the unfortunate 8,000 removed? “Participants were asked to rate their interest in football and other sports on a scale of one to four, from ‘not at all interested’ to ‘very interested’,” explains to 20 minutes Peter Weber, the director of Iris. Then, those who answered at least “interested” were asked to specify their degree of attachment to club football and nation football on the same scale. Those who answered at least “a little interested” were given the survey question “. Not only connoisseurs, then.
Bias poll with a focused question of only 15,000 fans and 3 out of 4 possible answers less than 4 years old. #FIFA 🤡 pic.twitter.com/db4jfxWob8
– CoronaPyrrhus (@CoronaPyrrhus) September 16, 2021
When ?
The data collection took place between June 29 and July 9, before the real possibility of a closer World Cup is raised by the instance. We always come back to the same comparison, but a poll on “Who would make a good President of the Republic?” ”Does not have the same meaning in March 2019 and March 2021.
Let us also add that the study commissioned by FIFA took place at a very opportune moment: the end of the Euro, between the quarter-finals and the final, perhaps the most exciting matches of the year with the last all of C1. It is not forbidden to imagine that the football fan, at that time, wants to see this more often.
What question was asked?
The exact words: “If you consider your personal interest in the World Cup, without taking into account any consequences of needing to change the current schedule, how often would you like to attend a World Cup? “
A random remark? The respondent is specifically asked not to think about the consequences of a change in the calendar, or on the health of the players, if on the supporters’ portfolio, for example. We would have obtained a sample of different answers with a question articulated in this way, for fun: “At the risk of blasting the planet even more because of the incessant travel and of ending up in the open every summer because of the costs of travel, is it? that you would like to see a World Cup every two years? “
What were the possible answers?
This is where we split the pear. Since the subject is whether to stay on a four-year cycle or go down to two years, why not offer just those two answers? But no, FIFA also offers the option, “every year”, and “every three years”. That is, three out of four answers which propose to reduce the wait between each meeting.
While it is therefore quite correct to write that a majority of respondents are in favor of a more regular meeting at 55%, the status quo of a World Cup every four years remains largely in the lead , at 45%, compared to 30% every two years. In the same vein, what would be the preference of those who opted for a triennial competition (14%), if they only had the choice between an event every two years or every four years? And as for the 11% who want to see a 48-team butcher shop every year, one wonders if they really know football, or if they like it at least a little bit.
Contacted to clarify the choice of the title of the question asked and its answers, FIFA refers to its initial objective when launching the consultation: “It will make it possible to carry out an exhaustive analysis of the situation, taking into account the various interests and points of view within world football, without predetermined goals, in a spirit of openness and seeking the best solutions in the interest of football. Hence the most open question possible.
Is there a disparity of points of view according to the countries of the respondents?
23 countries, or rather “markets”, were selected “according to their level of interest in football, their audience, geographic diversity and their demographic dimension, the objective being to obtain representative data for each region, ”explains FIFA. We may be surprised at the absence of France, Argentina or Italy, as the choice of some countries who do not often qualify for the test and who could therefore see in this reform a selfish opportunity. New Zealand rather than Australia in Oceania, or Egypt and South Africa out of the three countries chosen to represent Africa.
However, you have to be honest until the end. Respondents from the European Confederation, the most hostile to change, are the most widely represented in the panel (28%), far ahead of Africa (16%), which pushes to death for a biennial World Cup via the Confederation African football (CAF). The overall result? It is very rare to find a country where the status quo is not the preferential option when you add up all age categories, outside of Saudi Arabia – it was the Federation that submitted the proposal to Congress. FIFA – Egypt, and Turkey.
And according to their age?
The generational choice between crumbling old people and young hyperconnected zappers, already put forward by the founders of the ephemeral Superligue to sell us their poisoned salad, is a reality, of course, but a reality that should be qualified.
Even among 18-24 year olds, “the consumers of tomorrow”, it is the current rhythm that keeps the hand, of a short head (37%, against 31% for a World Cup every two years), when the most 55-year-olds want to keep the calendar as it has been set since 1930 at nearly 60%. Obviously, we see from here Fifa we get out that a majority of young Americans are in favor of a biennial World Cup (43% vs 39%), but we will retort to them when we are talking about a panel of 397 voters for all age categories in the USA, which should give us a wet finger at 80 respondents under 24 years old, if the proportions are respected.
Difficult, overall, to rely on a poll with so many limits to justify moving to a World Cup every two years, if FIFA needs a poll to encourage it in its projects. But Infantino has already commissioned a second survey, of an unprecedented scale (more than 100,000 people in more than 100 countries) which aims to be “more general in its approach, by taking into account elements such as population, diversity. geographic, history and potential of national football ”. Can’t wait to see the result? We neither.