Skip to main content

The Withdrawn Teams and their Replacements in World Cup History

 


A number of teams did need to withdraw from the World Cup for several reasons and were replaced in the final round.

The 2026 FIFA World Cup is only four months away, but the latest developments around the globe and in the host nations raise concerns about whether the tournament will ever continue to be held in North America. After the violence in Guadalajara, one of the city hosts in Mexico, the US military strikes to support Israel on Iran’s soil hit deeper than just political issues, especially following the departure of their religious Supreme Leader recently.

Iran has reportedly been in doubt about participating in the current FIFA World Cup, as they are based in the USA. The travel restriction for Iran’s fans to US home soil could definitely trigger a worsening of the situation. 

FIFA has yet to decide team Melli's fate in the final round, as well as their replacement. Iraq and UEA have been deemed the potential one on the list. 

 Throughout the tournament’s history, several teams had to withdraw for different reasons. Most of them were replaced by their direct oppositions, but a few simply lost their berth as their replacement opted to decline the opportunity. Here are those teams which experienced such circumstances, plus their story beyond.

However, only the teams whose withdrawal had a direct impact on their opponent’s chance to qualify directly count here, while those which declined to play at the early stage of the qualifiers will not be included.

Italy 1934 (three nations)

In the second edition of the FIFA World Cup, Italy 1934, the qualifying round was firstly introduced for all contestants, including the host. However, several nations opted to withdraw from the qualifiers, with specifically three nations from South America choosing to do so voluntarily.

The reigning champion, Uruguay, refused to travel as a sign of protest to their European counterparts due to their rejection of participating in the previous edition, even by invitation. Meanwhile, Peru and Chile withdrew because of logistic and financial reasons. Such led Brazil and Argentina to take their place. They were their direct opposition in the qualifiers with only a single game for two berths for CONMEBOL.

France 1938 (five nations)

In the following edition, more nations opted to withdraw from the tournament. Uruguay remained absent from the qualifying round; Argentina followed their neighbouring rival’s footsteps, as they felt dismayed by FIFA’s decision to be more in favour of Europe instead.

The 1938 edition was supposed to be given to CONMEBOL due to the expected turn.

Unfortunately, the world football governing body was more in favour of Europe, with France as the elected host, instead of Argentina, which had already applied for the host. Consequently, Brazil was taking Albiceleste’s place.

Apparently, they were not the only team withdrawing from the competition at the expense of the other team securing the berth by walking over. Egypt and Cuba were the ones who did and were replaced by the USA and Romania.

Meanwhile, Austria was unable to send their team due to the ‘Anschluss’ despite being qualified. They were colonised by Germany. Their spot was initially given to England by invitation path. However, the FA declined, as they saw it lacked prestige compared to their own British Home Championship.

Brazil 1950 (ten nations)

The first edition of the FIFA World Cup after World War II was also not immune to the withdrawal issue. Ten nations decided to decline to send their team in the competition due to various reasons, including two elite sides.

Argentina was one of them. Albiceleste was involved in a political disagreement with Brazil, resulting in their rejection of taking part in the 1950 edition. Peru and Ecuador also opted for the same but with different motives. Their absence gave the advantage for Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia and Chile to take their berth.

Meanwhile, from UEFA, France also declined to go, despite replacing the withdrawing Scotland because of the travelling schedule. Portugal, which was supposed to take two consecutive teams which withdrew, Austria and then Turkey, did the same, whereas Switzerland qualified at the expense of Belgium. They were not in their ideal circumstance to send the team after suffering the world war.

The weirdest team withdrawing from the world cup was India. The South Asian side qualified through walkover win following Burma's withdrawal. Nevertheless, they eventually opted not to play themselves due to their obligation to wear boots!! India preferred to play with barefeet but such proposal was rejected by FIFA despite their fairly successful campaign in summer Olympics 1948 without boots on the pitch.

Switzerland 1954 (one nation)

In the following edition, Poland became the only team to withdraw at that time. They declined to play against Hungary in a two-legged qualifying match mainly due to internal non-sporting reasons, which was quite a shock. As a result, the Mighty Magyar went through the final round without even having to kick the ball.

Apart from Poland, Argentina also continued to decline playing in the qualifiers. However, their absence did not instantly impact the other teams’ success in qualifying, as only two berths were available for the CONMEBOL side.

West Germany 1974 (one nation)

The last team to withdraw from the crucial stage of the World Cup leading to the direct berth in the final round was the USSR. The Eastern Europe giant rejected playing in Santiago for the second leg of the intercontinental playoff for the sake of their own security following the coup of Augusto Pinochet. The former Chilean president was infamous for executing people in the national stadium, in which the USSR and Chile were scheduled to square off.

They requested FIFA name a different venue for the match, but an agreement could not be reached. The Soviet Union was eventually disqualified, as they remained firm on their refusal at the expense of Chile’s return to the FIFA World Cup after their absence in Mexico 1970.

 


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Father and Son Footballers who played for different nations

  A number of father-and-son footballers have surprisingly not played for different national teams due to a various number of reasons. Football often runs in the family. Ideally, they all shine and have a chance to play for the same national team. Unfortunately, in some families, it is not always the same. The father sometimes becomes the star while the son barely can match the father’s stardom, or the other way around. Having a father who was also a famous footballer does not always give you an advantage. On the contrary, it can put huge pressure on the son, which eventually has an impact on their form. Such could lead to their failure to earn a cap in his father’s national team. Let alone thrive with them. That is what Luca Zidane experiences. He is the son of Zinedine Zidane, Les Blues' hero in the 1998 FIFA World Cup and EURO 2000. His father was undoubtedly one of the greatest footballers of all time with three FIFA Best awards in hand. On the other hand, Luca has neve...

The Ex-Goalkeepers Turning Successful Managers Outside the Top Leagues

  Several notable former goalkeepers who thrive as managers from outside the European top leagues deserve recognition. The goalkeeper position has often been underrated despite its crucial role in football defence, especially in the past. Goalies tend to be deemed less likely to succeed when they become managers. Being a tactician demands the ability to read the game in their playing career. Thus, the best head coaches are normally the former midfielders or defenders. The likes of Pep Guardiola, Carlo Ancelotti, Luis Enrique, Zinedine Zidane, Jurgen Klopp, and Thomas Tuchel are the proven examples, as they all used to operate from the second line or backline and get involved in the attacking build-up. However, it does not mean that former shot-stoppers is bound to fail in their managerial career. Some manage to shine as well when they are in the dugout. Julen Lopetegui, Nuno Santo, Dino Zoff, and Raymond Goethals are the popular examples. They have been frequently discussed d...

1966 FIFA World Cup, Synonymous with Fortune

  The 1966 World Cup returned to European soil, and this edition became synonymous with an air of fortune — not only for the hosts, but also for the debutants. It was the first World Cup staged in an English-speaking nation. The homeland of Queen Elizabeth was chosen as host at the FIFA Congress on 22 August 1960, defeating West Germany and Spain. Even before the tournament began, FIFA and the organising committee were thrown into turmoil by the disappearance of the Jules Rimet Trophy. To make matters worse, FIFA did not possess a replica, given the uniqueness of the original prize. Fortunately, the trophy was recovered just four months before kick-off — and remarkably, it was not found by the authorities, but by a dog named Pickles . In hindsight, it proved to be the first stroke of luck in a tournament filled with fortunate twists. 1966 World Cup Fun Facts   England 1966 produced several distinctive facts compared to previous editions. Here are some notable highlights ...