European FAs pushing for three-week international break to be abandoned

Europe’s football associations have raised serious concerns about the impact of the extended international break and will ask Uefa to push for a reversion to the previous scheduling.

The new three-week break left European countries tasked with four Nations League games, which typically took place within 11 days. It has brought deep misgivings about player workload, injuries and financial viability, with one FA president telling the Guardian it was “a disaster” and numerous others saying the schedule is unworkable.

Related: Havertz, Isak, Dorgu … spate of injuries with national teams leaves sour taste for top clubs

Opposition to the break was virtually unanimous when it was discussed at a meeting of European FAs in Berlin on Thursday, the subject understood to have prompted a series of passionate interventions. The Football Association chair, Debbie Hewitt, and chief executive, Mark Bullingham, were among those to speak out highlighting the drawbacks of a calendar change approved by the Fifa council in 2023. Many expressed clear preference for the set of five two-week breaks that preceded this season.

The break, which truncates the previous September and October windows into one longer spell, was intended in part to improve player welfare and reduce travel commitments. But an overwhelming number of FAs are unhappy with how a bruising run of Nations League fixtures, generally played at a higher intensity to friendlies and with fewer substitutions available, worked out in practice.

Kylian Mbappé, Alex Scott, Cody Gakpo, Alexander Isak and Brian Brobbey are among a lengthy list to have picked up injury issues. It is a worry that unites Uefa’s members, with smaller countries additionally concerned that their reduced player pools offer less scope for players to be rested. There is also a sense that countries with bigger resources have a competitive advantage when playing a large chunk of their Nations League fixtures at once, a potentially significant consequence given Euro 2028 seeding will be determined by performance in this competition.

Some federations also expressed dissatisfaction about the break’s commercial implications, reporting the challenges of marketing and selling tickets for two home matches in close proximity. International games are usually valuable ways for football associations to raise funds.

Another FA president suggested the window should be adapted according to the needs of each continent, although the logistics of such a plan would be unclear. A counterpoint was raised by a different FA chief, who said his federation would conduct an analysis of the break’s merits and pointed out the benefits of extended time for his national team’s manager to work with players.

Although there is a strong appetite that Uefa lobby Fifa to scrap the format, the prospects of their efforts bearing fruit are slim. Relations between the governing bodies have plummeted to an all-time low since the Fifa Forward Enterprise scandal and, just as relevantly, the international match calendar is locked in until 2030. Any success may hinge on a change of leadership at Fifa, whose under-fire president Gianni Infantino is looking to win a fourth term in March.