This tournament is of huge symbolic importance for FIFA, marking the centenary edition of a sporting event that is rivalled only by the Olympic Games for the worldwide interest it generates.

Uruguay held the inaugural 13-team World Cup in 1930 at a time when the men's football tournament at the Olympics was the game's most prestigious honour, and not the age-restricted event that some question the need for it has become today.

Tapping into that historical element, Uruguay wants to bring the World Cup back for 2030, although this time it has been required to enlist the support of neighbours Chile, Paraguay and the holders of the trophy Argentina with the tournament set to feature a whopping 48 teams.

It is certainly the romantic choice for 2030 World Cup, but cannot rely on that alone given the stiff competition from the Iberian and Arabian Peninsulas, both of whom are working to provide as compelling a case as they can.

The latest development came last week, with Spain and Portugal shelving what did seem a highly unrealistic proposal to include war-torn Ukraine in their bid. The scandal involving Ukrainian Association of Football President Andriy Pavelko, arrested in November last year for an alleged misuse of international aid funds which he denies, was seemingly the final straw.

Morocco instead appears set to be added, which geographically represents a more sensible move. Politically too, last year's World Cup semi-finalists could prove a shrewd addition to the Iberian bid given how their stock has risen in football, not just through success on the pitch.

The North African nation stepped in to host last month's men's FIFA Club World Cup at short notice. It has failed in five previous attempts to host the World Cup, but attracted 41 of the 52 votes from African countries for the 2026 edition - votes which could be crucial for Spain and Portugal, backed by UEFA, in their attempts to avoid the disappointment they encountered bidding for the 2018 World Cup.

A broad appeal appears a must given a potentially tri-continental Saudi-led bid.

Saudi Arabia has made no secret of its desire to stage the men's World Cup. A project with Italy failed to materialise, but it appears to have a willing European ally in Greece - not that reports of its involvement have gone down particularly well there - and an enthusiastic partner in Africa in Egypt.

If South America is the romantic option, many fans in the sport's traditional powerhouse nations would view a Saudi-led World Cup as the embodiment of a perceived unsavoury direction men's football has taken since its influx of riches. "Game's gone", if you will.

The oil-rich nation continues to face an abundance of questions related to its human rights record and its motives for hosting major sports events, including over the alleged state-ordered assassination of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in 2018, its role in the bombing of Yemen, use of the death penalty and harsh restrictions on women's rights.

It would likely require the tournament to be moved to the northern hemisphere's winter a la Qatar 2022 too given the heat and humidity, posing further scheduling headaches for clubs and leagues and creating potential fan apathy in Europe.

The backlash FIFA has faced over reported plans for tourism board Visit Saudi to sponsor to this year's Women's World Cup in Australia and New Zealand - something it has been mysteriously quiet about - provides a sign of what could come if Saudi Arabia advances its 2030 ambitions.

But do concerns over the suitability of a host nation really matter to FIFA? President Gianni Infantino's description of Qatar 2022 as "the best World Cup ever", the same claim he made after Russia 2018, probably tells you all you need to know.

You can look further back too at the staging of the 1978 World Cup in Argentina when the country was under the control of a brutal military junta led by Jorge Rafael Videla, concerns over pay and conditions on construction sites for venues used at South Africa 2010, Brazil 2014 and Russia 2018 - many of which have become white elephants - and violence deployed against protestors in Brazil nine years ago.

And yes, as many defenders of Qatar last year pointed out, the United States hardly holds an angelic status as the self-proclaimed world policeman given its dubious foreign policy record, including its support for numerous harsh dictatorships, and domestic racial inequality and wealth gap. It held the 1994 World Cup and was awarded the 2026 edition with Mexico and Canada under perhaps the most controversial President of all time in Donald Trump, who hinted during the bid process that countries opposing its project could lose US support.

Sport separated from politics, officials might claim. Sceptics might respond sport separated from any moral standpoint.

Voting on World Cup hosts has been devolved by FIFA to an exhaustive ballot at the Congress, following the scandal over the double award of the 2018 and 2022 World Cups to Russia and Qatar respectively in 2010 which is perhaps the most extraordinary tale of sports politics in history.

It was settled by 22 men on the former FIFA Executive Committee, 17 of whom have since been accused, banned or indicted over allegations of corruption and wrongdoing, and is widely viewed as contributing to the fall of disgraced former President and International Olympic Committee (IOC) member Sepp Blatter.

With the system now essentially one-member one-vote, a slightly different ball game is required. The United Bid's success in 2018 for the 2026 World Cup was something of a given over Morocco's standalone proposal for the first 48-team edition.

This process may face deeper scrutiny this time around, with three strong bids a real possibility.

The FIFA Congress in Kigali on Thursday (March 16) represents a key opportunity for lobbying and building support, and could set the tone for the bidding battles in the build-up to the same gathering next year, which is due to decide on a host for 2030.

There should be plenty of time for the interested parties to do that too, given the FIFA Presidential election is going to be a classic one-horse race for Swiss IOC member Infantino, despite his ever-diminishing popularity among the sport's fans. Football is becoming famed, or perhaps ill-famed, for its leading administrators enjoying an uncontested re-election, as heads of the continental Confederations can attest to.

The IOC's new process for the Olympic and Paralympic Games mega event has moved the bulk of discussions behind closed doors and, if the example of Brisbane 2032 is anything to go by, made Session approval ceremonial.

It says this provides greater flexibility, reduces costs and widens the field of interested cities and countries, all of which may be true.

Yet for an observer, there is nothing quite like an old-fashioned bidding race.

The process for the 2030 World Cup looks set to provide an insight into the mechanisms of sports politics in 2023, and we can expect plenty of developments to follow once the formalities of this year's Congress are completed.