There was much to love and learn from in an inaugural event full of upsets and controversy
At its most simple, it was a win for English football. Beyond that, it proved that some traditions will never change.
Let’s start at the very beginning (a very good place to start).
The inaugural Club World Cup in the United States was a big experiment. One that would finally provide an answer to that ever-present question of “Who is the greatest football team in the world?”
Sure, there is the World Cup. But those are teams of international players who rarely see each other and only train for a few days a year for a tournament that takes place every four years. Most athletes’ time is naturally spent with their club teams in league play.
Even so, there are ways to see how city/club teams measure up to each other internationally. After all, the best European football team is crowned in the UEFA Champions League, the best South American fútbol team in the Copa Libertadores, and even the best North American soccer/fútbol team in the CONCACAF Champions Cup (and so on).
But aside from a six-sided Intercontinental Cup taking place every year that pits the winner of these continental competitions against each other — in a rather quick and unceremonious way that favors the European side, which enters in the final — there has never been a way to prove that a certain club team is the best in the world…
Enter Gianni Infantino, president of the governing body of world football, FIFA. A few years back, he was all over the news for being the biggest proponent of this new competition. A new competition-to-end-all-competitions. The next level of play.
But no one took it seriously.
Everyone was quick to share their pessimistic opinions on the tournament. The biggest argument was that it was a cash grab. Put the world’s largest club tournament in perhaps the world’s biggest sports-consuming country and throw in stars like Lionel Messi and Kylian Mbappé…it had profit written all over it.
Another concern was the timing — right at the start of the summer, it would cut off tons of precious rest time players had after their demanding seasons. Not to mention clubs that reach the knockout stages of the tournament would only have around a month before returning to preseason training.
Above all, the biggest concerns probably had to do with the location. While the diversity of the U.S. population made the nation a seemingly ideal location to encourage fans of all ethnicities to come out to support their teams from each part of the world, the lackluster soccer history in the U.S., full of small, empty stadiums and relative disinterest with local leagues led many to believe the tournament would be a big failure.
It’s safe to say people were waiting for this tournament to self-implode.
If you watched any of the games or have read any of my past few articles on the Club World Cup, you’ll probably know that the Club World Cup may not have been a complete success, but it’s hard to say it was an absolute failure.
The final between Chelsea and PSG is a good jumping-off point for this discussion.
It was the perfect final matchup. The European champions, fresh off a spellbinding 4–0 win against Real Madrid. Against Chelsea FC, the winners of the Europa Conference League (the third division of European international competition), who finally returned to the top of English football after two years of mediocrity.
Two teams that had overperformed this year and in this tournament. Two winners.
But there was a deeper narrative. PSG had never won a European Championship over the years despite having big names like Mbappé and Messi. Chelsea had always been in the shadow of the biggest clubs in English football, like Manchester United and Liverpool. Both clubs had been criticized in recent years for spending big with no result — in the case of PSG with top talents and Chelsea with unproven youngsters.
For both clubs, this was their chance to finally bring glory to their name.
The match got off to a quick start as Chelsea had a fantastic opportunity for star midfielder Cole Palmer, created by pristine passing play from the Blues; unfortunately, Palmer bent the shot just outside of Gianluigi Donnarumma’s net.
PSG soon had a chance of its own through a shot from star young attacker Désiré Doué. However, Chelsea was first to strike, as Malo Gusto got the better of a typically strong Nuno Mendes and, after having his first shot blocked, passed the ball to Palmer, who passed it into the back of the net in his typical calm, cool, collected fashion. He celebrated with his typical “Cold Palmer” celebration in front of a stadium erupting with cheers.
That goal was in the 22nd minute. It only took seven minutes for Palmer to find his second.
Yet another long ball, this time from defender Levi Colwill, sent Palmer off and running along the right flank. He cut inside and, surprisingly, none of the four defenders present put any pressure on him. He glided into space at the center of the box and tapped the ball into the left side of the net in a very similar fashion to the first goal. In the blink of an eye, PSG was getting a taste of its own medicine as it faced an uphill battle early on in the match.
At that point, it seemed like PSG would wake up after its ruthless attacking performances earlier in the tournament. However, Chelsea had the next big moment as Palmer rushed across the center line in yet another counterattack and found João Pedro, who finished with a spectacular chip. It was 3–0. Chelsea was killing in transition moments, as commentator Brian Dunseth astutely mentioned.
PSG had a few chances throughout the rest of the match. However, Chelsea goalkeeper Robert Sánchez came up big and kept an astounding clean sheet. PSG’s only major highlight in the second half was a red card for midfielder João Neves, who pulled the hair of Chelsea’s Marc Cucurella.
It was an unbelievable win for the Chelsea Blues.
It’s true, the match reflected a tournament trend of unrelenting surprise that led viewers to always expect the unexpected. Indeed, the final and the Club World Cup overall proved to be a true success in more ways than one for all parties involved (aside from PSG, of course).
However, also much like the tournament, the final was most certainly not all rainbows and unicorns.
For starters, it’s easy for critics of Chelsea to argue that the club seemed to get a fast pass of sorts to the final, as they played relatively easier opposition than PSG in the knockout rounds. While Paris had to go through some of the world’s best teams in Bayern Munich, Real Madrid and Atlético Madrid, Chelsea “only” had to face Flamengo, LAFC, Fluminense and Benfica, the last of which being the only European team the club faced (and not necessarily one of the biggest names in Europe, with all due respect to Benfica).
However, this fast pass argument relies on the Euro-centric claim that European football is the best football on the planet, and while this opinion could be supported by evidence regarding the history, tradition, and financial capabilities of European teams, it is certainly up for debate and thus not necessarily credible enough to warrant much attention. After all, Chelsea did struggle against Palmeiras and lose to Flamengo, so it did not just fly through to the final.
A larger problem with the final may be the growing world bias for English football that the result encourages. It’s true, many of the world’s football nations tend to think that their league is the best. Even proponents of Major League Soccer in the United States sometimes argue that the play here is some of the best in the world.
Take Argentine legend Sergio Agüero, who has suggested that Lionel Messi’s Inter Miami could compete for titles in a league like the Premier League. While I want to believe these claims, it’s easy for me to understand that Major League Soccer clearly is not the best league in the world (maybe top 10?).
However, sometime after the dominance of Italian football at the end of the 20th century, there seems to have grown the opinion that English football is the best in the world. I see this opinion a lot here in my home nation, where many who watch the sport seem to idolize Manchester City and Tottenham, Liverpool, and other English elite teams as if there is no other league than the Premier League (besides maybe Barcelona and Real Madrid’s La Liga).
Whenever people ask me who my favorite team is, they look at me with empty eyes when they hear Napoli and Borussia Dortmund, as opposed to a team like Chelsea.
In this lies my problem with Chelsea being dubbed “the best team on the planet”. Only two English teams entered the tournament of 32, and while Chelsea deserved its win, a grand opportunity was lost to introduce another league and national fanbase to the world’s viewers. Sure, Chelsea can be a team people should keep an eye on. But I don’t want them to be the only team people keep an eye on.
That’s not to say that Chelsea will be the only club on people’s minds going forward — although, similar to the way movie watchers tend to remember the ending best, it is likely many people will choose to remember Chelsea’s win above all else.
The resilience of Brazilian teams like Fluminense and Botafogo will not be forgotten. Likewise, people will remember that many stadiums were more packed than expected. Just take the final, in which 81,118 fans attended a 98% filled MetLife Stadium.
But it’s true, for every filled stadium, there was an empty stadium on one of the opening days of the tournament. For every intense matchup, there was a match played in intense heat that led bench players to swap sitting on the sidelines for staying in the cooler locker rooms.
And for every time an underdog team won a big match, like Botafogo’s upset of PSG in the group stage, there will be moments like Chelsea’s trophy lifting, when American President Donald Trump got on stage with the players to lift the trophy, leaving both players and fans confused.
Was this Chelsea’s moment? Or a chance for FIFA to show off a new money-grab showcase? Was it England’s time to shine? Or America’s? If everyone claims victory, who suffers defeat?
It was the perfect celebration of sport and the perfect storm. It’s hard to tell if this inaugural Club World Cup was a success in the end, even if FIFA President Gianni Infantino declares it was. Perhaps we’ll never really know.
But one thing’s for certain, this tournament is here to stay, whether we like it or not.
Kudos to Chelsea and all of the teams and fanbases of the Club World Cup for showing out and showing the world what each club is really all about. I had never heard a Brazilian supporter’s group chant before this tournament (live or otherwise), and if there’s one thing I’m looking forward to at the next Club World Cup, it’s the chance to keep on discovering the world’s beautiful fan cultures.
Oh, and if you don’t know by now, I really like the matches too. But don’t we all love the magical thing that is sports?
It’s been a ride, this tournament. So here’s to another four years of soccer, football, and fútbol.
Gian Lombeyda, signing off on the Club World Cup.
Until next time.
Thanks for reading my story! You can read more about sports, especially the beautiful game, here: https://medium.com/@gianlombeyda
And receive the latest sports stories by email: https://medium.com/@gianlombeyda/subscribe
Let me know what you think about the ever-changing sports world in the comments!