I generally experience a wave of sadness after the FIFA World Cup ends. After over a month or so of near-daily football, especially up to the quarterfinals, I always feel rather empty after the final. A couple of friends I know had the good fortune of being at the World Cup, even attending a match or two. But, in that time zone, the real magic, according to them, was that the games during the group stage were at 12pm, 3pm, 6pm and 9pm — every day. There was always football to watch throughout the day. On our side of the world, however, the timing was less conducive. But still, it was hard to get away from a complete festival of, effectively, competing tribalism.
Anyway, as the World Cup played out, I thought that there were pretty good themes or lessons that translated well into the field of policymaking, horrible pun intended. I suppose this is no surprise to regular readers (thank you!) who know how much I enjoy finding analogies, metaphors and transferable lessons from the NBA, movies, Green Day lyrics and so on to public policy. (The only reason this article is about the World Cup instead of The Odyssey is because I don’t want to spoil the movie yet for those who have yet to watch it. Having said that, please do yourself a favour and enjoy the cinematic experience that is Christopher Nolan’s rendition of The Odyssey.)
First, you really have to do what works best for you and your endowment. Spain won the World Cup with a masterclass in possession control, playing the game as only they can. This was most evident during their especially convincing semi-final victory over France who, for most of the World Cup, were seen as favourites given the explosiveness of their attack. Sure, when you have Kylian Mbappé, Michael Olise, Ousmane Dembélé, Désiré Doué and Bradley Barcola, this is precisely what France should do.
Argentina, on the other hand, basically played a style which was a magical blend of the dark arts and fine art, having a team that tried to keep things solid — as best they could anyway, as they conceded plenty of goals in the knockout stages to teams like Cabo Verde and Egypt (both of whom deserve all the plaudits) — and then winning via moments of genius from some dude named Leo. Say what you want about Argentina, the strategy of Messi and the dark arts did get them all the way to the final.
Now, teams can try to play like Spain, or play like France, or play like Argentina, but if you don’t have the personnel, it won’t work. The flipside also holds — if you assume that you can play the same way against one team and expect it to work against another, that might not be true given the endowments of the different teams. England parked the bus, a man down, against Mexico and survived. It was much harder to do that against Argentina because Argentina had Messi and Mexico did not. Anyway, public policy has to also make do and start with what countries actually have, a point made most poignantly by Johns Hopkins University Professor Yuen Yuen Ang. You can’t just be a copycat to Singapore, Taiwan or whoever and assume it will work. All policy has to be relevant to the context. Taking policies straight from textbooks rarely ever works in day-to-day policymaking.
Related to that, it is also worth thinking about decision-making under highly stressful situations with difficult constraints. The internet was awash with all kinds of befuddlement after England’s defeat to Argentina, wondering why they decided to park the bus and just camp out in their own penalty box despite playing pretty well and having a 1-0 lead, inviting pressure from Messi. Similar questions were asked of Argentina in the final, where their first shot, of any kind, was only in the 107th minute.
So, here’s the thing. I’m not a professional football manager despite nearly 10,000 lifetime hours of playing Football Manager. When I am puzzled about why an actual professional football manager is doing something, I feel like the question I ask should be, “What am I, an armchair football fan, not seeing?” instead of, “What is the professional football manager with actual experience, who has an actual stake in the game, not seeing?”
Public policy is the same. Governments have to make all kinds of decisions, often under all kinds of constraints. Once we map out the constraints and objectives — political, social, economic and so on — many of the seemingly irrational policy decisions will suddenly appear to be “optimal” under those constraints. I often see commentators critique policymakers on a first-best world basis, failing to recognise that we may be in a third- or fourth-best world.
For instance, during the Covid-19 lockdowns in Malaysia, some businesses were allowed to open. One of the most infamous was gold stores. I recall the perplexity at the time, but as it turned out, the reason gold stores were allowed to operate during all the Movement Control Orders was not for people to buy gold. It was for people to sell gold — to survive. Of course, that people had to resort to such measures indicates policy shortcomings elsewhere. But not having that option might have made things worse.
The next lesson is on industrial policy and developing local capabilities. A couple of friends of mine at the Oxford Technology and Industrialisation for Development (TIDE) Centre, Amir Lebdioui and Baptiste Albertone, wrote a nice essay about how the development of football in many countries today resembles long-term industrial policy planning. One example they cite is Japan’s “Pledge for 2050” which committed to win the World Cup by 2050, and backing that up with the creation of U-15 and U-18 leagues, a permanent European scouting office to pipe Japanese players to European leagues and shifting the J-League season to align with the European season.
Another example is Morocco, which built the Mohammed VI Football Academy, runs a nationwide scouting network and admits a small “excellence” cohort into a fully subsidised programme. Five players from that academy started for the 2022 Moroccan World Cup squad (semifinalists). Moreover, Morocco won the 2025 Fifa U-20 World Cup.
Amir and Baptiste also note the importance of diaspora engagement — 24% of all players at the 2026 Fifa World Cup were born outside the country they play for. For many non-traditional football powers, it really isn’t likely that a top quality World Cup squad will emerge from pure “market” forces. Long-term state intervention is required as well. Economic development is unlikely to be any different.
Finally, the best thing about the World Cup — at least to me — is less about the football itself, and more about how the citizens of different countries interact with their football team and, more importantly, with one another in the most heartwarming of ways. The Scotland fans left such an impression on the city of Boston that Boston and Glasgow have officially established a sister-city partnership. Kansas City effectively adopted the Algerian national team when the team set up their World Cup base camp in Lawrence, Kansas. There were Mexicans and Koreans dancing in joyful glee in Mexico City to Gangnam Style. Norwegian fans taught the Senegal fans the Viking row after their match against each other. I think we can all agree the world needs way more of this.