Intercontinental Cup: A World Title or Just an “Official Friendly” Between Europe and South America?

The FIFA Club World Cup is coming, and with it, a somewhat controversial question resurfaces: should the winners of the Intercontinental Cup be considered world champions? This question has divided fans, experts, and generations of football lovers for over 60 years.

As you can imagine, the answer depends on who you ask. Every fanbase has its own view of the tournament — which, in addition to not being organized by FIFA, featured only representatives from Europe and South America.

In this ongoing saga of recognizing non-FIFA tournaments, full of twists and turns, we’ve prepared this special feature on the Intercontinental Cup. Was it truly a world championship or just an “official friendly”? Here’s everything you need to know about more than six decades of history. Let’s dive in.

What was the Intercontinental Cup?

The Intercontinental Cup was a tournament played between the winners of the Copa Libertadores and the UEFA Champions League to determine the world’s top club. Held from 1960 to 2004, the competition was also known as the European/South American Cup and the Toyota Cup, and it is officially recognized as a world title — even though FIFA wasn’t involved in organizing it.

As covered in our special article about the 2000 Club World Cup, FIFA did consider creating a competition of this scale in the early 20th century. While its main focus remained on national team tournaments, interest in such a club competition was very much present — though organizing duties were left to other entities.

On October 8, 1958, João Havelange — then president of the CBD (now CBF) — announced the creation of the Copa dos Campeões da América (which would later become the Libertadores) and the Intercontinental Cup — a one-on-one match between the South American champion and the European Champions League winner.

Organized by UEFA and CONMEBOL and referred to as the Club World Cup by the press and fans since its inception, the Intercontinental Cup was played from 1960 to 1979 as a two-legged series — one match in each team’s home stadium.

The tournament was not held in two editions: Bayern Munich and Independiente were supposed to face off in 1975, and Liverpool and Boca Juniors in 1978, but scheduling conflicts made both editions unfeasible. Additionally, European interest in the competition was not always strong — five editions saw UEFA champions decline to participate, and in those cases, the runners-up were invited instead.

Because of these issues, there were even talks of discontinuing the tournament after 1979. That didn’t happen thanks to a sponsorship proposal from Toyota, which led to the Japanese Football Association becoming involved in organizing the event — now renamed the European/South American Toyota Cup (or just “Toyota Cup” to fans).

From then on, the tournament was played as a single-match final at a neutral venue: the National Olympic Stadium in Tokyo, Japan. Only the final three editions were held at a different location, the International Stadium in Yokohama — still on Japanese soil.

When FIFA created its own Club World Cup in 2000 — featuring champions from all confederations — discussions about merging the two tournaments began. Due to contractual obligations, that merger became official in 2005 — though, as you might expect, this transition came wrapped in controversy.

Is the Intercontinental Cup recognized as a World Championship?

If you search through content on FIFA’s own website, you’ll find that Intercontinental Cup winners are referred to as world champions. So, does that mean we can close the case here? Not quite — because that’s more of a symbolic label. The only “official” world club competitions, in this context, are those organized by FIFA itself — which it defines as “the true global club competition”.

However, both the Intercontinental Cup and the European/South American Cup have always been considered official tournaments at the confederation level. They’re officially recognized titles by both UEFA and CONMEBOL — and as you can imagine, often referred to as world titles.

Moreover, then-FIFA President Joseph Blatter declared in 2000 that Corinthians were the first club world champions. He reinforced this statement in 2006, during a press conference before that year’s Club World Cup. A special exhibit during the 2011 tournament also highlighted Corinthians as the first club world champions.

The debate evolved further in 2013, when FIFA’s Secretary General publicly stated that the winners of the now-defunct Intercontinental Cup were, indeed, world champions. According to him, changes in competition formats are normal and “what matters is that every competition crowns a champion — and that stays in history.”

To settle the issue once and for all, CONMEBOL President Alejandro Domínguez formally requested in June 2017 that FIFA officially recognize the Intercontinental Cup as a world championship — and FIFA agreed. Since then, the winners have been labeled as “Club World Champions,” and the tournament has been merged into the history of the current FIFA Club World Cup.

Why might the Intercontinental Cup not be considered a World Cup by everyone?

If FIFA already recognizes the Intercontinental Cup as a world title and merged it with the Club World Cup, why do some people still disagree? Here are the main arguments used:

Only South Americans and Europeans played in the tournament

The FIFA Club World Cup made a major step toward global reach: it gave clubs from every continent a chance to participate, not just Europe and South America. Even though only those two continents have produced FIFA World Cup–winning national teams, the value of other regions in developing top players and teams shouldn’t be ignored.

So why did only UEFA and CONMEBOL teams participate in what was considered a “world” championship? For one, confederations like CONCACAF and the AFC were only founded in the 1960s and did request to join the tournament — but those requests were denied by the organizers. FIFA itself had no involvement in this process.

This is a fair criticism. By definition, a “world championship” should include all continents. FIFA addressed this issue starting with the 2000 Club World Cup by including every confederation — yet the organization still officially recognizes the Intercontinental Cup as a world title.

“The champion didn’t always face the Champions League winner”

Six editions of the Intercontinental Cup didn’t feature the UEFA Champions League winner, who was replaced by the tournament runner-up. Panathinaikos, Juventus, Atlético de Madrid, Borussia Mönchengladbach, Malmö, and Milan all competed without having won the European Cup that same season.

Looking at results, CONMEBOL teams had the upper hand: South America won five of those six editions, and Europe just one — Atlético de Madrid’s 2-1 aggregate win over Independiente in 1974.

Would history have been different if Nottingham Forest, Liverpool, Bayern Munich, Ajax, and Marseille had played Nacional, Independiente, Boca Juniors, Olimpia, and São Paulo? Possibly. But those South American clubs still faced elite opponents — and even FIFA acknowledges their strength.

“I’m a world champion, but my rival isn’t”

Pelé’s Santos is one of the most iconic teams in football history and won the Intercontinental Cup in 1962 and 1963 against Eusébio’s Benfica and Cesare Maldini’s Milan. However, in 2011, Santos lost 4-0 in the FIFA Club World Cup final to Messi’s Barcelona and has never won a FIFA-organized world tournament.

A similar case is Grêmio, who beat Ernst Happel’s Hamburg in the 1983 Intercontinental Cup. But in 2017, Grêmio lost 1-0 to Cristiano Ronaldo’s Real Madrid in the FIFA Club World Cup final.

What do these two teams have in common? Corinthians, São Paulo, and Internacional have all won the FIFA Club World Cup — and some rival fans joke that Santos and Grêmio are “intercontinental” champions, not “world” champions. This narrative is weak, especially since FIFA has unified the Intercontinental Cup with its own Club World Cup.

“Europeans didn’t care as much about the Intercontinental”

If you ask a fan of any South American club that won the Intercontinental Cup, the pride will be clear. Ask a European fan, though, and the reaction may be more muted. That’s largely due to the financial and technical gap between Europe and the rest of the world.

For fans of top European clubs, the UEFA Champions League is the highest standard in global club football. Winning it often feels like the ultimate achievement — no matter the competition afterward.

Facing a team seen as less competitive or without a long-standing rivalry doesn’t excite European fans in the same way. Still, the Intercontinental Cup and its participants were treated with respect.

It’s also worth noting that CONMEBOL fans tend to downplay teams from other regions that didn’t compete in the Intercontinental. Shocking defeats like Internacional’s loss to Mazembe in the 2010 Club World Cup or Atlético Mineiro’s loss to Raja Casablanca in 2013 are often viewed as humiliations — even though those opponents were strong, respected clubs with fewer financial resources.

“Winning a continental title is worth more than this official friendly”

Another narrative that has spread across social media is that the Intercontinental Cup was more of an official friendly than a tournament taken seriously by all involved. We’ve already touched on this point earlier, although the label of “official friendly” has become more commonly associated with the competition in recent years by some fans.

South America hasn’t won the Club World Cup since 2012, when Corinthians defeated Chelsea 1–0. This 13-year drought is the continent’s longest since such tournaments were established, and in six of those editions, South American teams didn’t even make it to the final — which has left many disappointed.

It’s no surprise, then, that some fans and journalists have started to adopt the European view of the tournament: winning the Libertadores is a more important achievement than “FIFA’s friendly tournament,” which is seen as a cherry on top — and losing it isn’t the end of the world.

Still, it’s worth noting that winning a world title will always rank above any continental, national, or regional trophy in FIFA’s own hierarchy. Having a trophy room filled with silverware doesn’t necessarily define a club’s greatness — what matters most is the connection with its fans and the stories the sport helps write.

After all, football is subjective, and each fanbase values victories in its own way — whether as a collective or on a personal level. So, having a FIFA Club World Cup, only a Toyota Cup, or not even a Libertadores or Champions League title doesn’t determine how great a club really is.

Is FIFA’s current Intercontinental Cup not a World Cup?

In an effort to make the Club World Cup more appealing to European clubs and solve a long-standing issue, FIFA decided to abolish the Confederations Cup and replace it with the expanded FIFA Club World Cup — to be held every four years with more teams.

Starting in 2024, the Intercontinental Cup returned under FIFA’s own banner, maintaining the same format used for the Club World Cup from 2005 to 2023 — that is, featuring the champions of each confederation and the host nation’s representative. And yes, it still awards the title of… world champion.

Confusing? It gets worse. In 2024, FIFA itself stated on its official site that Real Madrid would be playing in its 11th final of a FIFA world club competition. Moreover, it referred to the 1992 edition of the tournament as the… FIFA Intercontinental Cup.

So yes, we can say that the transformation of the Club World Cup into the FIFA Intercontinental Cup hasn’t changed the fact that the competition crowns a world champion every year. And this was a request from the confederations, aiming to keep annual interest and competitiveness alive.

And yes, the winner of the FIFA Club World Cup will still be considered a world champion. It will be a title reserved for an even more exclusive group of clubs, as the competition will now be held every four years, feature more teams, offer greater competitiveness, and award massive prizes — starting with \$15.2 million just for participating, plus bonuses for wins, draws, and advancement, with up to \$125 million going to the champion.

Bet on the FIFA Club World Cup at Blaze!

Thirty-one clubs from eleven countries have earned the honor of being called FIFA world champions — despite ongoing debates over the unification of titles from non-FIFA-organized tournaments. And starting June 15, the FIFA Club World Cup will determine who gets to claim they conquered the world the hardest way possible — and keep that title for the next four years.

But before placing your bets on the Super FIFA Club World Cup, remember that responsibility matters even more than your lucky jersey or any other superstition fans might believe in. Like the sport itself, betting should be purely for entertainment — never a financial strategy or source of income.

That’s why it’s essential to study data and statistics, along with each team’s performance, before placing a bet. Playing irresponsibly and ignoring the risks of each market can lead to serious consequences for your mental and financial health — and also affect those you care about.

Sounds good? Then get ready to feel the emotion of the world’s biggest club tournament and bet on the FIFA Club World Cup 2025!