Why eight of the world’s 10 biggest nations are missing from the World Cup

Only two of the world’s 10 most populous countries, the United States and Brazil, are competing at the current World Cup, according to the BBC, which has examined why the game’s biggest stage so rarely reflects the planet’s largest populations.

The broadcaster reports that scenes of wild celebration greeted Lionel Messi’s opening goal for Argentina against Algeria on 17 June, yet the crowd cheering him on was made up entirely of Bangladeshi supporters at a street gathering in Dhaka. With no team of their own at the tournament, millions across Bangladesh, India and Indonesia have effectively adopted nations such as Argentina and Brazil as their own.

Of the world’s 10 largest nations by population, the BBC notes that Russia and Nigeria have appeared at multiple previous World Cups, while China and Indonesia have each featured just once. India, the most populous country on Earth, Bangladesh, Ethiopia and Pakistan have never played at the finals, though India controversially withdrew from the 1950 tournament in Brazil after originally qualifying.

“Simply unacceptable”, says Bangladeshi fan

Bangladeshi actor, writer and football fan Audite Karim told the BBC: “It is simply unacceptable that a country with millions of football fans should lag so far behind in football.”

The broadcaster spoke to British academic and economist Stefan Szymanski, co-author of the best-selling book Soccernomics, about why raw population figures translate so poorly into footballing success. Szymanski explained that football success resembles a national economy, requiring people, capital and infrastructure, including training facilities and effective talent identification.

According to the BBC, Soccernomics found that nations typically need an annual average income per capita of at least $15,000 (£11,300) to have a realistic chance of winning a major trophy. Yet Brazil and Argentina, whose average incomes sit well below that threshold, have won eight World Cups between them, a discrepancy Szymanski attributes to decades of accumulated footballing know-how.

History and experience count for more than headcount

Seven of the eight nations to have won the World Cup – Argentina, Brazil, England, France, Germany, Italy and Spain – have relatively large populations, the BBC points out, with Uruguay the notable exception. Uruguay, a nation of just 3.5 million people, won the tournament in 1930 and 1950 having played its first international match in 1902, well before many rivals had even formed representative sides.

Szymanski argues that this head start explains why European and South American nations continue to dominate, having been playing competitive football for over a century longer than many African and Asian countries whose football structures developed later. He cites Morocco, independent since 1956, as an example of a younger footballing nation that has closed the gap, reaching the World Cup semi-final in Qatar in 2022. South Korea, meanwhile, remains the only Asian side to have reached the last four, doing so as co-hosts in 2002.

The BBC also highlights Ethiopia, which has never qualified for the World Cup despite winning the Africa Cup of Nations in 1962. The country came closest in qualifying for the 2014 tournament, reaching the final qualifying round before losing to Nigeria over two legs. Local media cited by the BBC describe chronic underinvestment in Ethiopian football, including a lack of suitable stadiums to stage the current domestic season’s fixtures.

Szymanski told the broadcaster that countries such as Indonesia, India and Bangladesh continue to fall further behind despite their vast populations, largely due to a shortage of resources and infrastructure, adding that even significant new investment would take considerable time to overcome the accumulated footballing experience enjoyed by the game’s traditional powers.