European football associations are mounting pressure on Uefa to abandon the new three-week international break introduced this season, arguing it has proven unworkable in practice and placed excessive strain on players.
The revised calendar condensed what were previously separate September and October windows into a single extended period, during which national teams were required to play four Nations League matches inside 11 days. The change was originally approved by the Fifa council in 2023 with the stated aim of easing player welfare concerns and cutting down on travel.
However, the reality has drawn widespread criticism from football associations across the continent. At a meeting of European FAs held in Berlin, opposition to the format was described as almost universal, with the topic sparking a string of heated contributions from delegates. One FA president went so far as to call the arrangement "a disaster," while numerous other representatives labelled the current schedule unsustainable.
Among those voicing objections were the Football Association's chair, Debbie Hewitt, and chief executive, Mark Bullingham, who both highlighted the downsides of the revamped calendar during the Berlin talks. A clear majority of attendees expressed a preference for returning to the previous structure of five separate two-week breaks rather than persisting with the compressed format.
A central concern has been player fitness. Nations League fixtures tend to be played at a more demanding intensity than standard friendlies and offer fewer substitution opportunities, a combination that has coincided with a string of injuries. Kylian Mbappé, Alex Scott, Cody Gakpo, Alexander Isak and Brian Brobbey are among the high-profile names to have suffered injury setbacks during this period, fuelling anxiety among federations of all sizes. Smaller nations are said to be particularly worried, given their limited squad depth leaves less room to rotate or rest key players.
There is also unease about competitive fairness. Associations with greater resources are seen as better equipped to cope with a congested block of Nations League matches, raising questions about balance at a time when performances in the competition will help determine seeding for Euro 2028.
Beyond the football concerns, several federations pointed to commercial drawbacks. Staging two home fixtures in quick succession has complicated efforts to market matches and sell tickets, undermining a key revenue stream that international games typically provide for national associations.
Not every voice in the room was opposed to the new system. One federation president suggested the ideal solution might be to tailor the break's length and timing to the specific needs of each continent, though how such a model would function logistically remains unclear. Another FA chief struck a more measured tone, noting that his association intended to carry out its own review of the break's impact and pointing to the added benefit of giving national team managers more sustained time with their players.
Despite the strength of feeling among European associations, the likelihood of Uefa successfully persuading Fifa to reverse the change appears limited. Relations between the two governing bodies remain strained following the Fifa Forward Enterprise scandal, and the international match calendar has already been fixed through to 2030. Any realistic chance of reform may depend on a shift in Fifa's leadership, with president Gianni Infantino currently seeking a fourth term in office ahead of elections in March.
Based on reporting from Guardian Football.