The games that show the flaws in a 48-team World Cup

It takes 72 games to reduce the number of teams at the World Cup from 48 to 32 [Getty Images] The World Cup has, so far, lacked an element of real jeopardy in the group stage. Granted, South Korea may disagree after a shock 1-0 defeat by South Africa on Wednesday sent Bafana Bafana into the knockout stage for the first time. But it is limited peril, because South Korea are still very likely to reach the last 32 as one of the eight best third-placed teams. A record of three points and goal difference of -1 is probably going to be enough. But had the defeat by South Africa happened at the 2022 World Cup, when only the top two teams in each group qualified, South Korea would already be on the plane home. The addition of third-placed qualifiers is a necessary feature of this new format - to ensure we get 32 teams in the knockout rounds. But it has created additional scenarios in which teams can play for specific results to either qualify or, in effect, pick opponents. Two matches in particular this week will be a real test of the format. Could teams play out convenient draw? Expanding the World Cup to 48 teams always presented one obvious problem - it was an imperfect number for a tournament. With 32 teams, the maths was simple - eight groups of four teams, with the top two going through to a last 16, then quarter-finals, semi-finals and a final. By adding another 16 nations, Fifa had to find a way to get to a symmetrical knockout stage. There was no ideal solution - one which preserved the intensity of the previous format. The original plan was to create 16 groups of three teams. The two top in each would go through to the last 16. But there was an issue. Three-team groups meant individual fixtures - and those in the final match would know exactly what they needed to do to qualify. Nations could play for specific results to secure their passage to the knockout rounds. Fifa, after all, knew all about alleged collusion from the scandal at the 1982 World Cup . Back then, with groups of four, teams did not play their final group matches at the same time. West Germany faced Austria in the standalone last game. A slender win for the Germans would send both teams through at the expense of Algeria. The match finished 1-0 to West Germany. Algeria went out. Fifa changed the format so all final fixtures would be played simultaneously, but that would not have been possible with three-team groups. The climax to the group stage in Qatar was so exciting that Fifa had a rethink. It accepted there must be 12 four-team groups and two matches would be played at the same time to determine who would qualify. Except for one crucial difference - something that removed much of the jeopardy which made the last World Cup so gripping. Eight of the third-placed teams must go through for there to be 32 teams in the knockout rounds. It became harder to be knocked out than to progress. And one issue becomes clear with two matches this week. First up, Australia play Paraguay in Group D on Thursday (03:00 BST Friday). Then on Sunday it is Austria v Algeria in Group J (also 03:00 BST). The teams are second and third in their groups, and all on three points. Four points is almost certain to be enough to take one of the eight third-placed qualifying slots. It creates a situation in which the teams could simply play out a draw. With two groups finishing before the Socceroos' match kicks off, the teams will have a better idea if four points is going to be enough. It is even more advantageous for Group J as the final one to complete. Austria and Algeria will definitely know the result needed to be a best third-placed team. After being impacted in 1982, Algeria could be the beneficiaries in 2026. There are many examples of teams playing out the final 10 minutes of a group game with no interest in attacking because they both know they are going through. It does not mean the two teams will just play for a point this week, of course, but it presents the opportunity. At Euro 2020 we had the same circumstances. Ukraine and Austria went into their last match in second and third respectively on three points, aware that four points would probably be enough to go through in third. But the teams did not play out a draw. Austria won 1-0 to move up to second, with Ukraine eventually squeezing through to the last 16. Ukraine were one goal better off than Finland, who lost their last fixture later the same day. The bookmakers are certainly taking no chances. The odds for a draw in Ecuador-Germany, Japan-Sweden and Norway-France are between 3-1 and 4-1. For Australia-Paraguay and Austria-Algeria, the odds are close to even money. Selling cars & air miles conundrum - what now for Tartan Army? What each team need to reach World Cup knockouts Have World Cup changes made final group stage games unfair? Teams who play later might prefer a more favourable fixture Teams could, of course, play for specific results before third-placed teams qualified. Take one incident at Euro 2004, which led to Italy goalkeeper Gianluigi Buffon and Italian federation president Franco Carraro making accusations of match-fixing . If Sweden-Denmark was a draw and the teams scored at least twice, Italy would finish third because they scored fewer goals in matches between the three sides. Sweden equalised in the 89th minute. The final score? Sweden 2-2 Denmark . Uefa insisted there was nothing suspicious about the result. There is a further twist at this World Cup. The fixtures for the third-placed teams are determined by which groups provide the qualifiers. Play early, and you don't have an idea where you will go if you finish third. Play later, and you know what the path looks like. What does that mean in reality? The runners-up in Group J will play the winners of Group H - Spain are top of the table right now. But where will the third-placed team in Group J go? They could play the Group L winners, perhaps England, or Switzerland who finished top of Group B. Austria and Algeria will know what that the last 32 is. They could be in a position where finishing third is more favourable than second. Rather than playing for a draw, Austria might feel they are better off losing and taking up that match. The weather may yet play a part too. If there are storms which cause a match to be paused , Fifa says the other game in the group will not be halted. So, one fixture might be suspended for a couple of hours due to lightning, and when the teams comes back out they know what they need to do to qualify. If Australia-Paraguay and Austria-Algeria do play out draws there, will probably be questions about the integrity of the format. But this has been Fifa's choice. The World Cup did not need to be expanded, but it was part of the manifesto on which Gianni Infantino was elected in 2016. Maybe it will give Infantino a reason to restore the tournament to a perfect number. Not reducing to 32, but increasing to 64. Play BBC Sport's new World Cup predictor game World Cup fixtures and group standings How to watch the World Cup on the BBC Everything you need to know about the World Cup