FIFA

When Gianni Infantino was chosen to replace Sepp Blatter as president of FIFA, he was seen as a reformer, someone who would bring transparency and openness to soccer’s international governing body, which had long been mired in scandal and deceit.

A decade later the reformer has been exposed, hoisted by his own petard after a secret partnership with a member of President Trump’s family circle to sell 20% of the World Cup to private investors was exposed. It was a deal so brazen it made past FIFA transgressions seem quaint by comparison.

Less than two weeks after Infantino closed one of the most successful World Cups in history, one that brought in a record $15 billion in revenue, The Times of London revealed that Infantino had begun bribing FIFA’s 211-member associations, giving them until Sept. 19 to accept his plan to sell a stake in the commercial and tournament rights to the World Cup and other FIFA tournaments to a private equity firm headed by Joshua Kushner, the brother of Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law and an inveterate White House counselor.

Sign on, the federations were told, and you’ll get $20 million. Decline, and FIFA will give you just a fraction of that.

Under pressure, Infantino announced Friday he was withdrawing the plan, known as the FIFA Forward Enterprise. But it turns out there was more to the proposal than originally thought.

Much, much more.

Which is why Infantino’s campaign for reelection to a fourth term as FIFA president next March, a campaign which had the support of more than 200 FIFA members two weeks ago, now appears doomed.

The national federations of Serbia, Sweden and Wales on Monday withdrew their support for Infantino and England’s FA is expected to do the ‌same. UEFA, the governing body for European soccer and the largest and most powerful of FIFA’s six continental confederations, is threatening legal action while two other confederations — CONCACAF, the largest of FIFA’s two confederations in the Americans and the AFC, which manages soccer in Asia — have issued condemnations.

Those three confederations together represent nearly 140 FIFA members, meaning if they hold together there is no path for Infantino to get the 106 votes he would need to win reelection.

So how did we get here? How did Infantino go from progressive reformer, the overseer of newly transparent and accountable FIFA, to the man who literally tried to sell the World Cup? The journey may not have been as long as it seemed because Infantino may never have been the Boy Scout he was initially perceived to be.

Days after his first election as president in 2016, his name surfaced in leaked documents indicating that, while a senior legal official at UEFA, he had co-signed a broadcast deal with a company subsequently linked to a U.S. investigation into FIFA corruption. Later that same year, a FIFA committee opened an investigation into whether Infantino breached the organization’s Code of Ethics.

Infantino was eventually cleared by that probe but another pattern soon emerged, one that saw the president morph from a soccer bureaucrat into someone who believes he should be mixing with presidents and kings.

Infantino inherited World Cups that had already been awarded to Russia and Qatar, but he aggressively downplayed the human rights abuses in the two countries. Russian President Putin rewarded that by presenting the FIFA chief with the Order of Friendship medal. Qatar did better than that, giving Infantino use of a luxury Gulfstream G650 jet from its government fleet.

FIFA president Gianni Infantino, far left, takes a selfie with (from left) President Trump, Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney during the World Cup draw in Washington on Dec. 5.

(Andrew Harnik / Getty Images)

If Infantino, born to blue-collar Italian parents in Switzerland, had previously been driven by a desire for power and money, one former close associate told The Times of London that the FIFA president “views himself as one of the oligarchs now.”

And no government gave Infantino more access to the corridors of power than the Trump administration. Infantino rented office space in Trump Tower, attended Trump’s second inauguration, mingled with him and his guests at Mar-a-lago, accompanied him on diplomatic missions to the Middle East and was a frequent visitor to the White House.

Last October, Infantino took to Instagram to say that Trump “definitely deserves” the Nobel Peace Prize. When he didn’t get it, Infantino simply created his own award, presenting Trump with first FIFA Peace Prize last December.

But the access to the top levels of the U.S. government may have created Infantino’s Icarus moment. The beginning of Infantino’s fall may have started last year at the White House when he and Portuguese star Cristiano Ronaldo attended a black-tie dinner to honor Saudi Arabia’s crown prince Mohammed bin Salman.

Five days earlier Ronaldo had been given a red card and a three-game suspension for a serious foul, a penalty that would have forced him to miss the start of the World Cup. After the White House event, FIFA announced Ronaldo’s suspension had been lifted, allowing one of the World Cup’s star attractions to play in the tournament.

That was an incident Trump remembered last month when he personally — and successfully — petitioned Infantino to lift a red-card suspension for U.S. striker Folarin Balogun the day before a World Cup round-of-16 game with Belgium. It was just the second time in history a suspension was overturned during a World Cup.

Infantino also pushed through a number of other World Cup firsts for this summer’s tournament. He added three-minute hydration breaks each half, upsetting more than a century and a half of soccer tradition while giving six more minutes of advertising space to broadcasters; he introduced a halftime show for the final, nearly doubling the intermission break for the tournament’s most important game; and he pioneered a dynamic pricing scheme that more than doubled the cost of tickets from 2022.

Those moves were designed to boost FIFA revenues, and they did — as did Infantino’s push to expand the 2026 World Cup to 48 teams and 104 games. But his luck ran out with his plan to give outside investors a share of the tournament, a scheme known to the White House — Jared Kushner was originally involved, according to reports — but few others.

One damning part of the plan involved a potential future role for Infantino in the investment fund. As FIFA’s president, Infantino earns an annual salary of $6 million, but if reelected, he can serve just one more term, meaning he’d be out of a job in 2031. However, multiple reports, citing unnamed sources, said Infantino was positioned to be chief executive of the investment arm in his post-FIFA days, a job that pays $30 million a year.

FIFA said that idea was never discussed. It also denied reports that Infantino had been rebuffed Monday in efforts to contact Trump for help in saving his presidency. But should he be pushed aside and should his days as a private equity manager never come to pass, there is another job Trump thinks he could do.

The president is reportedly considering pushing Infantino to become the next United Nations secretary-general when António Guterres’ term expires in December.

⚽ You have read the latest installment of On Soccer with Kevin Baxter. The weekly column takes you behind the scenes and shines a spotlight on unique stories. Listen to Baxter on this week’s episode of the “Corner of the Galaxy” podcast.

Wales have become the first nation to publicly withdraw backing for Gianni Infantino’s bid to continue his leadership of Fifa.

It follows the loss of confidence in the Fifa president following his scrapped plans to sell stakes in its competitions to private investment firms.

The Football Association of Wales (FAW) has confirmed “its withdrawal of support for the candidature of Mr Gianni Infantino for re-election as Fifa president for the 2027-2031 term”.

Infantino’s lucrative plan sparked a global outcry, with European football’s governing body Uefa threatening to boycott all Fifa competitions, including the World Cup.

Uefa and Concacaf – which oversees football in North, Central America and the Caribbean – both released statements on Saturday criticising the leadership of the world governing body following Infantino’s decision to withdraw the plan.

The FAW added: “The recent failures in good governance, processes, leadership, values, stakeholder management, communications and sound judgement have led us to a position where Mr Infantino has lost the confidence of the FAW to remain at the helm of world football.

“Failing to put the best interests of football first is a failure we cannot accept.”

The quickest route for Infantino’s exit would be for the Swiss to resign, like his predecessor Sepp Blatter did in 2015.

But Infantino still retains support and he could try to hold out until March, when he is up for re-election for a fourth and final term as president.

What other avenues are open?

The Fifa Council could try to force Infantino’s hand through an emergency meeting.

Such a gathering would be triggered if 19 of the 37 Fifa Council members call for one.

Uefa has nine members, AFC has seven, Concacaf five, Africa has six, Conmebol five and Oceania three. It is completed by Infantino and secretary general Mattias Grafstrom.

BBC Sport understands there are some doubts that the 19 votes could be achieved.

If they do get to 19, the meeting must take place within two weeks and the Fifa Council could call on Infantino to tender his resignation. But he could simply refuse to do so.

It would, however, add further pressure.

The next step would be an extraordinary congress of the 211 Fifa member associations, which would be held if one-fifth, or 43 associations, “make such a request in writing”.

So Uefa, which has 55 nations, can trigger the extraordinary congress whenever it so wishes.

That would take a minimum of two months from the point it is triggered, but more likely three months, and there is no guarantee of success.

In effect, it would be a de facto election without there being another candidate as 106 votes would be needed to pass the vote of no confidence.

Uefa has 55, Africa 54, Asia 46, Concacaf 35, Oceania 11 and Conmebol 10.

Africa, Conmebol and Oceania have not criticised Infantino’s plan.

So could Uefa get to 106? In total, 136 countries officially rejected the investment plan, but voting to reject an idea is not the same as voting to kick Infantino out.

Of the 136, Qatar have already publicly backed him and Mexico have distanced themselves from the joint Concacaf statement.

Which leaves finding a suitable candidate to fight the election in March.

Infantino stood unopposed when he was re-elected in 2019 and 2023 and if someone wants to battle him for the position, the deadline to announce their candidacy is 18 November.

Backlash to FIFA’s private investment plan for World Cups and events was huge; now football reacts to the U-turn’s fallout.

FIFA President ‌Gianni Infantino has said that world football’s governing ⁠body had ⁠scrapped plans to sell a stake in the World Cup and other events to private investors after widespread backlash.

The response to the plan, which was announced on Tuesday by Infantino, was overwhelming.

The wording of the outcry from around the globe was damning of the proposal, but stopped short of directly criticising Infantino.

The reaction to Infantino’s decision late on Friday to scrap the investment scheme, which would have sold minority stakes in World Cups and other FIFA events, ranges from overt votes of no confidence in the FIFA president to more subtle, but equally notable, condemnation of the week’s events.

“UEFA welcomes FIFA’s decision to withdraw its plan to sell a stake in ⁠its competitions – including the World Cup – into private hands,” European football’s governing body said.

“The current FIFA leadership has not only lost UEFA’s confidence but also that of many other members of the football family.”

“UEFA will begin ⁠work immediately with partners and stakeholders all over the world and right across the game to propose a new way of distributing resources through the existing FIFA Forward programme.”

“This is a victory for the whole game. But it must not be the end of the story. The proposal ‌has gone. The task of rebuilding trust in FIFA has only just begun.”

AFC’s president, Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa

“The future of global football must always be shaped through ⁠proper consultation, collective dialogue and respect for the established governance structures of our game,” said Sheikh Salman, president of the Asian Football Confederation.

“The AFC stands ready to support any initiative that strengthens the unity of the football family, contributes to ‌the continued growth of the game globally and delivers meaningful benefits to all stakeholders.”

“We stand shoulder to shoulder with our European colleagues and fully support the collective view,” an FA spokesperson wrote on its website.

“We oppose FIFA’s plans – the FIFA World Cup belongs to football and always will.”

Dutch FA statement

“With the withdrawal of the proposal, the matter is not settled for the KNVB,” the Dutch statement read.

“The ⁠way this process has unfolded has led to a fundamental breach of trust in the leadership of FIFA President Gianni Infantino. The KNVB no longer has confidence in his leadership.”

“We welcome FIFA’s ⁠decision not to proceed with the proposal. It is in line with our expectations in light of the flawed process and the reactions the proposal ‌has provoked,” Astrom said.

“At the same time, we are still concerned about deficiencies in transparency and governance, and want to emphasize ‌the ‌importance of continued discussion and dialogue about how football should be governed and developed.”

“As a founding member of FIFA and a representative on the FIFA Council, the RBFA remains committed to a strong, independent and sustainable model for international football,” Van Damme said.

“Football has never stood still, nor should it,” Isaac said.

“Throughout its history, our game has evolved through innovation, investment and new ideas that have strengthened football, created greater opportunities for players, ⁠coaches and referees, and enhanced the experience ⁠of supporters around the world. That spirit of progress must continue.

“Some principles, however, should never change. Integrity. Independence. Good governance. Transparency. Meaningful consultation. Due process. ⁠These are not constraints on progress. They are what make lasting progress possible.”

Asian Football Confederation says FIFA future must be ‘shaped through proper consultation’ after World Cup plan fallout.

Asian Football ‌Confederation (AFC) President Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa has ⁠welcomed FIFA’s ⁠decision to walk back plans to sell a stake in the World Cup and stressed the need ⁠to discuss all such moves with transparency in the future.

FIFA’s plan was to raise up to $4.2bn by ⁠selling about a 20 percent stake to private investors in a new unit that would run FIFA events, including the World Cup.

The proposal, first announced on Tuesday, had faced a storm of ‌opposition from regional confederations, including the AFC, which said they were blindsided by the announcement.

Following the backlash, FIFA President Gianni Infantino said world football’s governing body had scrapped the plans after listening “carefully to all the views”.

In a letter posted on the AFC’s website on Saturday, Sheikh Salman ⁠said he expects “any initiative that has the ⁠potential to impact global football will be presented and discussed with the Confederations, the FIFA Council, Member Associations and other stakeholders in a timely, ⁠transparent and meaningful manner”.

“The future of global football must always be shaped through proper ⁠consultation, collective dialogue and respect for ⁠the established governance structures of our game,” he said.

On Thursday, Sheikh Salman, in a letter to member associations, had said the way the FIFA proposal had been made was “totally unacceptable“.

The Kuala Lumpur-based AFC is one of FIFA’s six confederations and is responsible for running ‌regional ‌club and national team competitions across continental Asia, the Middle East and Australia.

Heading into the final weekend of this summer’s World Cup, The Guardian reported that support for FIFA president Gianni Infantino had climbed to record levels. More than 200 of FIFA’s 211 member associations formally endorsed Infantino’s bid for a fourth term as head of world soccer’s governing body, the paper reported, making next March’s vote more of a coronation than an election.

Two weeks later, that support disappeared. Not only is Infantino’s reelection campaign in tatters, but there’s a chance he won’t survive until the spring, with British Prime Minister Andy Burnham and Javier Tebas, president of Spain’s soccer association, calling for his resignation and close confidants such as Carlos Cordeiro, the former president of U.S. Soccer, and Kevin Lamour, FIFA’s chief operating officer, publicly breaking with their boss.

At the center of that reversal was a closely guarded scheme to raise $4.2 billion by selling a 20% stake in the World Cup to private investors, who would be given influence in planning and executing future events, including broadcasting and commercial deals tied to the tournament.

In short, Infantino was planning, in secret, to sell shares in the World Cup. And once details began leaking in the media, he was forced Friday to scrap the whole thing, an embarrassing retreat that has left him vulnerable just two weeks after he had seemingly reached the heights of his third term as FIFA president.

Infantino’s idea, called the FIFA Forward Enterprise, was intended to turn the World Cup, FIFA’s milk cow, into a golden calf. But to do so, he needed the approval of at least 106 of FIFA’s 211 member countries, so he promised countries that backed him that they would receive $20 million each by mid-September. Those who declined would get just a fraction of that.

Infantino was certain the piles of cash would buy the acquiescence — or at least the silence — of enough members for the plan to go through. Instead, the bribe blew up in his face and FIFA issued a statement late Friday, under Infantino’s name, that basically said “never mind.”

“Having listened carefully to all the views, it has become clear that the project has created divisions of a nature that, regardless of the level of support, are no longer in the interest of the objective set out in the first place,” the statement read.

The question now becomes whether Infantino’s presidency will proceed.

He wouldn’t be the first FIFA president to be grievously wounded by unbridled ambition, but the speed and depth of his fall is staggering. The 2026 World Cup was, by nearly every measure, wildly successful. The largest and most complex sporting event in history the tournament, hosted by the U.S., Mexico and Canada, exceeded expectations, drawing more than 6.8 million live fans and a global TV audience of more than six billion. The four-year World Cup cycle brought FIFA revenues of about $15 billion, making it the first sporting event in history to earn more than $10 billion.

Infantino has never been shy about pushing boundaries despite heading a Swiss-based organization that, its wealth notwithstanding, is officially a nonprofit. Nor was this the first time he tried to bring private equity into the World Cup: In 2018, two years into his first term as FIFA president, he considered a plan to raise $25 billion to fund tournaments, only to cave in the face of massive opposition.

He didn’t give up the idea of squeezing more money out of the World Cup, though.

This summer, he introduced three-minute hydration breaks in the middle of each half — ostentatiously a nod to the heat and humidity, but in reality a ruse that allowed broadcasters to generate millions in additional revenue through TV commercials. FIFA also staged a halftime show for the first time ever during the final, sold VIP tickets priced at more than $1 million each and introduced dynamic pricing for the tournament’s 104 games, driving prices for some seats to four times what fans paid four years ago in Qatar.

That pushed the tournament beyond the reach of many of the sport’s most loyal supporters — and soccer, more than any other sport, belongs to the fans. It’s why teams are called clubs and fans are called supporters.

The World Cup, then, wasn’t Infantino’s to sell. So the pushback to his latest idea was immediate and unsparing.

“Football does not belong to investors,” Burnham said in an Instagram post. “Once you have sold a piece, you have sold out. Football belongs to the fans. It always has, and it always will.”

What really angered stakeholders, however, was Infantino’s brazen move to develop the FFE in secret, only to have its details leak out.

Bernd Neuendorf, president of the German soccer association and a member of the FIFA Council, the group’s most influential body, said he first learned of the FFE by reading about it.

“I was very surprised, and also annoyed, that we had to find out about something like this from the press,” he told a German news outlet last week.

Another self-inflicted wound was Infantino’s decision to launch the project with Thrive Eternal, a venture capital firm founded by Joshua Kushner, the 41-year-old brother of Jared Kushner, President Trump’s son-in-law and a kind of all-purpose White House advisor and negotiator. Thrive Eternal focuses on long-term investments in scarce cultural institutions that technology cannot replace, but it has little relevant experience in managing something as large and complicated as a World Cup.

FIFA president Gianni Infantino, left, and President Trump wave during an award ceremony following Spain’s win over Argentina in the World Cup final July 19.

(David Ramos / Getty Images)

Moreover, the partnership would draw Infantino further into the orbit of Trump, whom the FIFA president has openly courted for years. Infantino, who has been a frequent visitor to the Oval Office and Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida, attended the president’s inauguration and accompanied him on visits around the world.

Trump’s relationship to Infantino was questioned when Infantino presented him with the first FIFA Peace Prize last December, then became even more controversial when Trump phoned Infantino three times to lobby to have the red-card suspension of U.S. forward Folarin Balogun overturned ahead of a World Cup elimination game last month.

FIFA eventually cleared Balogun to play, marking just the second time in tournament history a red card ban has been lifted. For some, Infantino’s decision to partner with someone close to Trump on his latest venture was a bridge too far.

“It’s a really bad look for Infantino given the concerns about political interference that were already there after Balogun,” said Steven A. Bank, a professor of business law at UCLA who has written and lectured extensively on the economics of soccer. “Especially with the fund led by Jared Kushner’s brother.”

Once details of Infantino’s secret plan began to leak, UEFA, the confederation that governs European soccer, held an emergency meeting during which all 55 members — including Spain, the reigning men’s and women’s World Cup champion — voted to boycott all FIFA competitions.

“Some things are simply too important to sell. The FIFA World Cup belongs to football. It always will,” UEFA, the largest and most powerful of FIFA’s six continental confederations, said in a statement.

CONCACAF, which oversees soccer in North America, Central America and the Caribbean, said its 41 countries also rejected the plan, an opinion the U.S. Soccer Federation backed in a sparse post on X.

“U.S. Soccer stands with CONCACAF and its members,” it wrote.

The Asian Football Confederation joined in, saying in a statement its 47 members stand “in solidarity with UEFA and CONCACAF in expressing serious concerns over FIFA’s proposal to introduce private investment into FIFA’s flagship competitions.”

When it became obvious Infantino would not get the votes he needed to go forward, he pulled the plug on his plan. But it may not have been so much that the idea was bad as it was the execution.

Soccer is awash with private investors. The biggest clubs are owned by billionaires or sovereign wealth funds and many leagues — including Spain’s La Liga, which Tebas oversees — have sold commercial stakes to private equity firms in much the same way FIFA proposed.

Alan Rothenberg, a former U.S. Soccer president and the driving force behind the 1994 men’s World Cup and 1999 women’s World Cup, among the most successful tournaments in history, said the idea of selling a private equity stake in the World Cup isn’t a bad idea. But the way Infantino tried to implement his plan led it to failure.

“What is proposed is not that revolutionary,” Rothenberg said. “There have been private equity investors in MLS, in one of the subsidiaries of the NFL, in F1.

“But I think the combination of everything has doomed it. It does raise the possibility that Infantino, he’s finally become Icarus and gotten too close to the sun. It actually may doom him politically.”

Others including Cordeiro, a former vice chairman at Goldman Sachs, questioned the need to bring in outside investors.

“FIFA already has access to extraordinary financial resources. The organization sits on billions of dollars in reserves and no debt,” Cordeiro pointed out in his resignation letter. “If member associations believe additional investment is needed to develop the game, FIFA already has the financial capacity to provide that support from its existing resources.”

Infantino has flaunted consensus before without significant consequence, cozying up to autocrats while overseeing the 2018 World Cup in Vladimir Putin’s Russia and the 2022 tournament in Qatar before being accused of awarding the 2034 tournament to Saudi Arabia in a rigged vote.

This time, however, the stakeholders within FIFA were pushed too far by Infantino’s penchant for wielding unilateral power, so they pushed back and the president blinked. Hours before he backed down, an ally of Infantino’s told the Financial Times that he would not bend, seeing the standoff as “a fight to the death.”

Infantino’s presidency might not be dead, but it is surely in critical condition.

Fifa president Gianni Infantino says he has scrapped the controversial plan to sell off stakes in the governing body’s major competitions, following widespread opposition.

Infantino said it had become clear the project had “created divisions” that are “no longer in the interest” of its original objective.

The Swiss added: “As a result, this proposal will not proceed.”

Infantino had offered all 211 member associations $40m (£30m) if they backed a proposal for private investment in its tournaments, including the men’s and women’s World Cups.

European football’s 55 member associations, Uefa, voted on Thursday to boycott World Cups if the plans went ahead.

Fifa’s chief operating officer Kevin Lamour said the governing body’s own administration had been “deceived” about the project.

Carlos Cordeiro – Infantino’s senior adviser on global strategy and governance – resigned over the mater, saying the proposal was “a bad deal for football” and would “mortgage football’s future”.

That came after two other major confederations spoke out against the plans.

Concacaf, which governs football in North, Central America and the Caribbean – and hosted this summer’s World Cup – said its members “rejected” the proposal, with sources saying the vast majority of associations from the region are losing, or have lost, faith in Infantino.

The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) said it stood in “solidarity” with Uefa and Concacaf, while UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham said Infantino was “the wrong man” to lead Fifa.

Infantino, 56, is now under immense pressure as he seeks re-election for a fourth term as president at the Fifa Congress in March.

He said he now intends to “bring all interested parties back together” in the “spirit of shared interest” in football.

More to follow.

While Uefa members are among the richest on the planet, many other nations rely on Fifa funding for basic infrastructure.

While the AFC opposes Infantino’s plan, unlike Uefa it has not threatened to boycott Fifa competitions. AFC members would not be obliged to vote against the proposals.

Rogers Byamukama, of the Ugandan Football Federation, argued any avenue that could lead to more resources for nations like his should be explored.

“First and foremost, you need to understand that football is a very expensive venture, especially on the African continent where the resources are not easy to come by,” he told Newsday on BBC World Service.

“For instance in Uganda, the number of infrastructure projects that have been funded by Fifa from the resources generated by Fifa, especially at the World Cup, both from ticket sales as well as sponsors.

“On top of that, there are many grassroots programmes that have been funded by Fifa, including schools for football.

“From my perspective, any avenue that brings in more resources is good because those resources would be distributed and given to federations, especially on the African continent and that would inspire growth.”

Byamukama acknowledged Uefa’s right to speak out, but suggested its members were not reliant on Fifa funding like many associations in the rest of the world where Infantino remains popular.

In the first two cycles of the Fifa Forward development programme, through to 2022, $2.8bn (£2.08bn) was made available for investment across the 211 member associations.

Fifa Forward 3.0 – covering the years 2023 through to 2026 – has produced a 30% increase in funding.

Fifa has provided a further $5m (£3.7m) for every member association, with another $60m (£44.48m) paid to each confederation for their own projects.

After expanding the men’s World Cup to 48 teams from 32 for the 2026 edition, Fifa is seeking an independent agency to assess an expansion to 64 teams for the 2030 tournament.

The timeline on documents seen by BBC Sport said Fifa would receive agency proposals by 7 August, with a Fifa decision on 14 August. Delivery of analysis by the agency is then scheduled for 11 September.

Victor Montagliani (Concacaf president)

Like Infantino, he was elected in 2016 promising governance reform. A former president of Canada Soccer, as co-chair, Montagliani was heavily involved in the build up to, and delivery of the 2026 World Cup, the first to be hosted by three nations. He is fluent in French, Italian and Spanish, as well as English.

Explaining his decision to run for the Concacaf presidency, Montagliani told the BC Business website: “Like anything, when I decide to go, I go. I campaigned on my own dime for three months, went to see all 41 countries, from the US to Bonaire, a little island off Venezuela.”

Montagliani took the lead when Concacaf hosted an expanded Copa America in 2024 – in an interview with BBC Sport he rejected the idea it could become a regular occurrence. Politically strong, he smoothed relations around Arsene Wenger’s attempt to gain support for a World Cup every two years and has never truly bought into the idea of a 64-team World Cup.

At the Leaders conference in 2025, he outlined why he felt football was strong enough to ride out any storm.

“The game is bigger than world current leaders,” he said. “Football will survive regimes. Does it cause a headache? Of course. You have to be realistic about that. That is the beauty of our game, it is bigger than any individual and country.”

Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa (AFC president)

Initially elected in 2013, he was elected unopposed for a fourth term to run to 2027.

The Bahraini has presided over significant growth within the Asian confederation, through the Champions League Elite, Champions League Two, the Challenge League and the Women’s Champions League, which was launched in 2024-25. The Asian Cup has been expanded to 24 teams.

Sheikh Salman signed off the brutal takedown of how Fifa is being run by Infantino and has carried with him a 46-member confederation, many of whom are aware the figures being offered by Infantino’s plan are huge in terms of their overall football expenditure.

GENEVA — Pressure on FIFA President Gianni Infantino and his divisive plan to sell World Cup profits to private equity grew Friday as his senior adviser who sat on a White House panel resigned and Asia’s soccer body joined Europe and North America in opposing it.

An expanding crisis for soccer’s governing body reached into Infantino’s longtime inner circle when his pick to represent FIFA on the White House Task Force for the World Cup walked away calling the Joshua Kushner-backed $20 billion commercial subsidiary plan “a bad deal for football.”

Carlos Cordeiro is a former Goldman Sachs banker and officially is Infantino’s senior adviser yet revealed he said he was not involved in the secretive investment plan that has rocked the sport since media reports revealed it Tuesday.

“I cannot stand by while FIFA considers selling a stake in the World Cup,” Cordeiro said in a statement formally resigning, just hours after FIFA insisted in a statement: “Nobody is selling football.”

Cordeiro’s exit — and call for other senior staff to speak out — intensified scrutiny on Infantino one day after European soccer body UEFA threatened to boycott all FIFA games and events until the plan is dropped. North America’s CONCACAF also rejected Infantino’s offer of one-off $20 million payments to each member federation by a mid-September deadline.

Cordeiro often joined Infantino on working visits to meet U.S. President Donald Trump at the White House in recent years, and took part in meetings of the administration’s World Cup task force led by Andrew Guiliani.

“Let me be clear. I had no involvement in this proposal, and I oppose it unequivocally,” said Cordeiro, the former U.S. Soccer Federation president.

Asia joins Europe and North America

On another seismic day in soccer politics, Asia’s soccer body that has been a key ally in Infantino’s 11-year presidency opposed the investor plan and said FIFA must urgently review its management style

The Asian Football Confederation said it “stands in solidarity” with UEFA and CONCACAF, the first two continental bodies to oppose Infantino whose combined 90 FIFA member countries near a majority of the 211 global total.

“Football should never have been placed in such a position,” said the Asian soccer body, which counts 46 of FIFA’s 211 members

Infantino has proposed spinning off FIFA’s commercial businesses — including World Cups and Club World Cups for men and women — into a $20 billion subsidiary with 20% owned by private investors.

The “anchor investor,” described by FIFA, is a New York-based investment firm created by Joshua Kushner, the younger brother of Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.

“[T]he proposed [FIFA Forward Enterprise] cannot realistically achieve the necessary broad consensus and unity required to move forward” and must be reconsidered, the AFC said.

The statement did not name Infantino yet criticized FIFA for problems beyond the content of the private equity plan plus failing to consult about the secretive proposal.

“Rather, it has exposed fundamental weaknesses in FIFA’s consultation and decision-making processes that must now be addressed,” said the AFC, whose longtime president Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al Khalifa narrowly lost the FIFA presidential election to Infantino in 2016.

“Accordingly, the AFC calls upon FIFA to undertake an urgent review of its governance and decision-making framework,” said the organization based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

Infantino’s job at risk?

Infantino had seemed — 11 days ago after the World Cup final in East Rutherford, N.J. — to have a clear path to being reelected unopposed for a fourth and final term in office through 2031.

FIFA had briefed during the tournament that Infantino had letters of support from about 200 members, despite a furor over letting U.S. forward Folarin Balogun play against Belgium even though he received a red card in his previous game. Trump acknowledged asking Infantino to review Balogun’s mandatory one-game ban.

FIFA has set a Nov. 18 deadline for potential candidates to declare in a presidential vote of the 211 members scheduled next March in Rabat, Morocco.

The Asian statement came hours after FIFA blamed the media and doubled down on pursuing the project which now seems to have a majority of the 211 in opposition.

“Our planned consultation process was disrupted by incorrect media reports,” FIFA said in a statement early Friday. “We will proceed with this consultation process to ensure that each [member] has the ability to express its vote based on facts.”

The next FIFA event that would be targeted by the threatened European boycott is within weeks — the Women’s Under-20 World Cup hosted by Poland from Sept. 5. The four British federations comprise FIFA’s only bidder to host the 2035 Women’s World Cup. That decision is due Nov. 23.

Dunbar writes for the Associated Press.

FIFA’s World Cup 2026 expansion was their first since 1998, but the 2030 edition could rise to 64 teams.

FIFA is studying whether to expand the World Cup from 48 to 64 teams for the 2030 edition in a move that could reshape football’s showpiece tournament when it celebrates its centennial.

World football’s governing body wants to appoint an independent agency to assess the ambitious expansion plan, which would add another 16 nations to ⁠a tournament that had already grown from 32 to 48 teams in 2026.

“FIFA wishes to appoint an independent agency to determine whether and how expanding the FIFA World Cup from 48 to 64 participating national teams, starting with the 2030 edition, would impact on the tournament proposition,” it said in a research brief seen by the news agency Reuters.

South American confederation CONMEBOL had officially proposed hosting the 2030 World ‌Cup with 64 teams last year, allowing more countries the opportunity to join in the celebrations for the tournament’s centennial edition.

The 2026 edition in the US, Canada and Mexico was the first since 1998 to move away from the 32-team format, adding four more groups and an extra knockout round in the process, resulting in 104 matches over more than five weeks.

The accelerated study comes on the heels of FIFA’s plan to create a $20bn subsidiary to run the World Cup and its other events with external investors, a move that has attracted criticism and a ⁠UEFA decision to boycott FIFA events.

Al Jazeera has contacted FIFA for comment.

UEFA and FIFA could be on another World Cup collision course

UEFA President ⁠Aleksander Ceferin said last year that expanding the World Cup to 64 teams was not a good idea.

The European governing body’s position has not changed since then, while Asian Football Confederation President Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al Khalifa had also voiced opposition, questioning last year where further expansion ⁠might end.

FIFA’s proposed analysis is meant to assess whether the proposed expansion can strengthen the tournament or whether concerns such as competition dilution, calendar congestion, operational complexity and market saturation ⁠outweigh the potential benefits.

The study will examine the potential impact of expanding ⁠the tournament to 64 teams, including the effects on the competition, competitive balance, qualification, player welfare and the international calendar.

It will also estimate the revenues that could be generated from ticket sales, sponsorship and media rights under the proposed format.

“The final recommendation should demonstrate not only whether a 64-team tournament ‌can generate incremental value, but whether that value is sustainable,” the document added.

FIFA said a decision on selecting the agency would be made on August 14 and they would have only four weeks to deliver their analysis by September 11.

The ‌2030 ‌World Cup is being jointly hosted by Morocco, Portugal and Spain, while Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay will host one match each to celebrate the tournament’s 100th anniversary.

FIFA is already facing a dispute with its confederations due to a plan to sell stakes in World Cups and other events to private investors.

FIFA face global mutiny as Asian Football Confederation stand with Europe and North America after their boycott threats.

The ‌Asian Football Confederation has said it “stands in solidarity” with regional ⁠bodies UEFA and ⁠CONCACAF in opposing plans to sell a stake in the World Cup to private investors but stopped short of threatening ⁠to boycott events run by FIFA, global football’s governing body.

The confederation in a statement on Friday expressed “deep concern” over the proposed establishment of a $20bn commercial ⁠subsidiary, FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), to run the World Cup and FIFA’s other events.

“The fact that the situation has reached the point where the real possibility of a FIFA World Cup boycott has entered public discourse should concern everyone ‌who cares about the future of our game,” the statement said.

“Football should never have been placed in such a position.”

UEFA, European football’s governing body, voted unanimously on Thursday to boycott all FIFA events unless the plans were dropped. CONCACAF, the regional federation for North America, Central America and the Caribbean, has also rejected ⁠FIFA’s proposal.

On Thursday, AFC President Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa had said the way the proposal had been made was “totally unacceptable”, in a letter to member associations.

The AFC said “the proposed FFE cannot realistically achieve the necessary broad consensus and ⁠unity required to move forward.

“The FIFA World Cup ⁠is the pinnacle of global football and derives its strength from the participation of all confederations and the world’s leading football nations.”

The AFC also made a thinly veiled attack on the ⁠governing body’s president, Gianni Infantino, saying the plan “has exposed fundamental weaknesses in FIFA’s consultation and decision-making processes that ⁠must now be addressed”.

Even after FIFA issued ⁠a new statement on Friday, saying each national association “should be allowed to review the proposal and have a say in shaping their own future”, the AFC said “central concerns surrounding governance, ‌institutional process and meaningful consultation remain unanswered”.

It said the furore must become a catalyst for institutional reform at FIFA, and that “meaningful democracy is not ‌measured ‌solely by the opportunity to vote.

“It begins with transparent governance, timely consultation, informed deliberation and genuine participation throughout the decision-making process.”

Fifa president Gianni Infantino’s plan to sell stakes in competitions to private investors appears to be in jeopardy, with a third confederation expressing opposition.

In a statement published on Friday, the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) said it “stands in solidarity” with its counterparts in Europe and North, Central America and the Caribbean.

The AFC added Infantino’s plan could not “realistically achieve the necessary broad consensus and unity required to move forward”.

“The Fifa World Cup is the pinnacle of global football and derives its strength from the participation of all Confederations and the world’s leading football nations,” it said.

“Any proposal that risks undermining the unity and universal character of the competition must be reconsidered.”

The AFC’s statement means Infantino’s plans are unlikely to be approved by Fifa members if put to a vote.

Infantino had indicated the proposals would need a straight majority to go through – meaning 106 of its 211 members to vote in favour for the proposal.

Uefa – the body that governs European football – has 55 votes. Concacaf, which oversees football in North, Central America and the Caribbean, has 35 and Asia has 46.

Asian football’s governing body accused Fifa of once again setting the “direction of travel” for a “significant initiative” before consulting stakeholders.

It said Fifa’s failure to consult its member associations on the proposals had “exposed fundamental weaknesses in Fifa’s consultation and decision-making processes that must now be addressed”.

The AFC also criticised Fifa for leaving “confederations, member associations and even Fifa’s own governing bodies, including the Fifa Council, feeling sidelined.

“The Fifa World Cup, and the game itself, belong to the entire global football family,” it added.

Their future must always be shaped collectively, through institutions that reflect the voices of all Confederations and member associations.

“The AFC calls upon Fifa to undertake an urgent review of its governance and decision-making framework to ensure that proposals of global significance are developed through proper consultation, meaningful engagement and appropriate oversight by Fifa’s statutory bodies.”

Fifa wants to create a commercial subsidiary to run its main events, including its World Cups, and external investors will be able to buy stakes in it.

It said it would “invite third parties to make minority, non-controlling investments” in a new subsidiary – Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE).

On Friday, Fifa said FFE had been proposed “to ensure all Fifa member associations have the opportunity to take meaningful ownership of the commercial opportunity of football in their respective countries”.

“This does not come at the cost of either the spirit or the governance of Fifa or football itself,” it added.

However, Uefa has accused Fifa of using football “to enrich themselves and their friends”.

Infantino previously wrote to Fifa members saying they will receive $40m (£30m) if they back his controversial proposal. He set a deadline of 19 September for federations to accept his plans if they want to access an initial $20m (£15m).

If approval is granted, Fifa says Thrive Eternal is expected to lead the proposed investor group for FFE.

Thrive is an American venture capital firm founded by Joshua Kushner – the brother of US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared.

GENEVA — European nations agreed Thursday to boycott the World Cup and all other FIFA competitions to protest Gianni Infantino’s plan to sell stakes in soccer’s biggest tournament to private equity investors. The North American soccer body rejected his plan later the same day.

“UEFA and its national associations will not participate in FIFA competitions,” the European soccer body said after an urgent online meeting of its 55 member nations.

The next scheduled FIFA tournament is within weeks in Europe — the Women’s Under-20 World Cup hosted by Poland from Sept. 5 — and the four British federations comprise FIFA’s only bidder to host the 2035 Women’s World Cup. That decision is due Nov. 23.

“Some things are simply too important to sell,” UEFA said in a statement. “The FIFA World Cup belongs to football. It always will. And so long as Europe has a voice, it will never be for sale.”

The strategy meeting was called to counter FIFA president Infantino’s offer of $20 million to each of FIFA’s 211 global members that has to be accepted by mid-September.

Later Thursday, the 41-member Confederation of North, Central American and Caribbean Assn. Football (CONCACAF) met and announced it rejected Infantino’s plan.

In a statement, CONCACAF said members “expressed deep concerns about the lack of due process surrounding the proposal, the artificially short deadline imposed, and the absence of any review or approval by the relevant FIFA governance bodies.” It also questioned the need for outside investment “following the most profitable FIFA World Cup in history.”

Infantino’s secret project was revealed Tuesday to spin off its commercial operations in a new $20-billion subsidiary called FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) 20% owned by private investors. The core investor would be a New York investment firm created by Joshua Kushner, the brother of U.S. President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner.

Infantino wrote Tuesday to the 211 members — already the effective owners of FIFA as a nonprofit association under Swiss law — that if they approve FFE their promised $10-million basic funding for the next four years will double to $20 million. He projected their FIFA funding through 2038 would be $86 million each, instead of about $36 million.

“This is not merely a profound failure of leadership, but an abdication of FIFA’s duty as the custodian of world football,” said UEFA, where Infantino was a longtime staffer and its CEO-like general secretary when he was first elected to lead FIFA in 2016.

Infantino’s presidency at risk?

Infantino’s high-stakes financial gambit now could threaten his previously secure 11-year presidency of FIFA as anger and frustration with him rises among soccer stakeholders including three of the six continental bodies.

FIFA has set a Nov. 18 deadline for potential candidates to declare in a presidential vote of the 211 members scheduled next March in Rabat, Morocco.

Infantino had seemed — 11 days ago after the World Cup final in East Rutherford, N.J. — to have a clear path to being reelected unopposed for a fourth and final term in office through 2031, despite a furor over letting United States forward Folarin Balogun play against Belgium despite a red card in his previous game.

Soccer officials have said privately Infantino has eyed a lucrative commissioner-like role at the FFE spinoff beyond 2031.

“Game over, Gianni #InfantinOUT,” the Football Supporters Europe group, which advises UEFA on fan issues such as ticket prices, posted after the boycott threat.

Soccer’s concern at investor pressure

UEFA detailed Thursday why soccer officials fear external investors owning a stake of the global game’s biggest events, including World Cups and Club World Cups for men and women.

“The moment external investors acquire ownership interests in FIFA competitions, football changes forever,” UEFA said. “Commercial return becomes a permanent obligation. Investor expectations become a daily pressure.”

Infantino has presented the private equity offer as a chance to “turbocharge” funding development of soccer across the world, where a majority of the 211 FIFA members rely on its funding.

Officials from about 40 UEFA members spoke at the urgent meeting, with anger expressed that FIFA is not using some of its multi-billion reserves to fund extra development programs.

“As a result of today’s discussion, no UEFA national teams will participate in any FIFA competition for so long as these proposals remain alive,” the European soccer body said, “unless this proposal has been abandoned in its entirety and binding assurances have been given that FIFA will never again open its governance or competitions to private ownership.”

Asia adds rare criticism of Infantino

On a seismic day in soccer politics, a traditional bedrock of support in Asia for FIFA and Infantino had earlier Thursday been shaken.

“FIFA’s unilateral actions appear to undermine the very foundations of continental football,” the Asian Football Confederation president Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al Khalifa said in a letter to its 46 members of FIFA, warning of risks to their own competitions.

Sheikh Salman, an ally to Infantino since losing the FIFA presidential election to him in 2016, wrote “such an initiative will not succeed without the support of all the confederations, which is not the case now.”

In a video message published Wednesday by FIFA, Infantino insisted spinning off its money-making operations was “an offer, not an obligation.”

A FIFA presentation for its members, co-written with its banking advisors from J.P. Morgan and seen by the Associated Press, set a goal for FFE as “commercial rigor and expertise to better capitalize on broadcast rights, sponsorships and a growing tournament portfolio.”

FIFA squeeze on continental games

That growing portfolio probably would include adding more teams to FIFA competitions such as the World Cup and Club World Cup for men and women, and potentially staging them more often than every four years, including in the U.S.

FIFA adding teams, games and competitions would squeeze the value, status and space in the congested global fixture calendar for those that fund and are organized by the six continental soccer bodies like UEFA and the AFC. Those include World Cup qualifying games, continental tournaments and Champions Leagues.

“It is important that the AFC family has a complete understanding,” Sheikh Salman wrote, “of how such an initiative may affect key areas of global and Asian football, including the sustainability of confederation and [domestic] competitions, as well as the organization and commercial landscape surrounding the AFC’s activities.”

UEFA’s previous boycott threat

A threatened World Cup boycott from Europe helped derail Infantino’s plan in 2021 to play World Cups every two years instead of four.

Dunbar writes for the Associated Press.

BUENOS AIRES — After a bruising World Cup defeat gave way to what many Argentines saw as a sweeping wave of hatred against their country, Argentine President Javier Milei on Thursday signed an emergency decree empowering the government to deny entry to or expel foreigners who incite discrimination or violence against Argentines because of their nationality.

The measure adds new grounds to Argentina’s immigration law, allowing authorities to bar, deport and revoke visas of people found to have promoted hatred against Argentines in spoken or written statements or who have desecrated national symbols.

“In light of recent displays of hostility toward the Argentine Republic and Argentines, the national government reaffirms that the defense of the nation, its citizens and its symbols is non-negotiable,” the president’s office said. “Anyone who attacks the Argentine Republic is not welcome in our country.”

The move marks a sharp shift for a country that has long prided itself on welcoming immigrants. Argentina’s Constitution explicitly encourages immigration, and for decades the country has offered foreigners broad civil rights and relatively easy access to legal residency, public education and healthcare.

Milei’s office cast the decree as a response to weeks of criticism from celebrities, opposing fans and social media users after controversial refereeing decisions fueled speculation that FIFA had tilted the tournament in favor of the reigning champions and superstar Lionel Messi.

Condemnations of occasionally aggressive Argentine fans and the team’s roughhousing on the pitch soon broadened into attacks on Argentine society as a whole, amplifying long-standing criticism that Argentines view themselves as culturally and economically superior to their Latin American neighbors. Online petitions to expel Argentina from the World Cup drew hundreds of thousands of signatures.

The backlash intensified when Argentina players and staff became involved in a post-match brawl with Spanish opponents after the World Cup final.

FIFA, global soccer’s governing body, on Wednesday opened disciplinary proceedings against the Argentine Football Assn. over the scuffle, as well as over alleged racist abuse and fan misconduct. Players also faced a FIFA investigation into their parading of a banner that asserted Argentina’s claim to the British-controlled Falkland Islands after the team’s semifinal victory over England.

Milei, a close ally of President Trump’s, has described the torrent of criticism as an “anti-Argentina campaign.” He alleged without evidence last week that the left-wing governments of Brazil and Mexico and the U.S. Democratic Party had financed the effort to stigmatize Argentina to discredit his libertarian government.

His accusations and insults triggered a diplomatic crisis with neighbor Brazil, which recalled its ambassador to Argentina last weekend.

Thursday’s decree says the punishments don’t apply to ideological disagreement or political, academic or civic criticism protected under Argentina’s Constitution.

But it leaves unanswered how officials will distinguish protected speech from prohibited hate speech, whether immigration authorities will review foreigners’ social media activity and how aggressively the new powers will be enforced against tourists and longtime residents.

Debre writes for the Associated Press.

Uefa’s 55 member associations have voted to boycott the World Cup if Fifa proceeds with its plan to sell stakes in its competitions to private investors.

The decision was made at an emergency meeting on Thursday to discuss the proposals announced by Fifa – world football’s governing body – on Tuesday.

Uefa, which governs European football, had made its opposition clear by releasing two damning statements about the plans – and that strength of feeling has now been reaffirmed.

The boycott would cover all Fifa competitions, including the men’s and women’s World Cups and Club World Cup and be triggered if Fifa president Gianni Infantino’s proposals are voted through by member associations.

The first time this stance will be tested is October, when the Women’s World Cup play-offs are due to be held.

More to follow.

This week FIFA announced plans to form a new subsidiary company to run part of the World Cup and offer a 20% stake to private investors, worth over $4B. Jared Kushner’s brother’s investment firm Thrive Eternal has been named a likely buyer. Al Jazeera’s Mohammad Saleh explains.

FIFA’s president lobbies for latest proposal for investment in football’s governing body, which has met with criticism.

FIFA President Gianni Infantino has set a September 19 deadline for the 211 member federations to accept a one-off $20m offer to each underwritten by the investment firm of Jared Kushner’s brother as part of a project to sell stakes in the World Cup.

Infantino set out the “singular and unique funding opportunity” in a letter detailing why he wants to create a $20bn FIFA subsidiary that would be 20 percent owned by private investors and would run the football body’s competitions and events like World Cups and Club World Cups.

“It is my duty and responsibility as FIFA president to present such game-changing opportunities to you, our members,” Infantino wrote on Wednesday in the letter seen by The Associated Press news agency.

The proposal, revealed on Tuesday and backed by Joshua Kushner’s investment firm Thrive Capital, was met with immediate fury by Infantino’s former colleagues at the European football body UEFA, which said the World Cup “is not FIFA’s to sell”.

UEFA is expected to call its 55 member federations to an emergency online meeting, likely on Thursday.

Joshua Kushner’s brother, Jared Kushner, is a son-in-law of United States President Donald Trump.

FIFA’s private equity plan is the latest ambitious project proposed during Infantino’s 11-year presidency, during which he has increasingly seemed to be an executive leader acting without consulting football’s major stakeholders.

Previous plans include creating a FIFA Peace Prize and trying to reorganise football’s calendar with World Cups every two years instead of four.

Concerns about the previously secret plan were aired on Wednesday by the continental football bodies for Asia and the North American, Central American and Caribbean region, known as CONCACAF.

“We are deeply concerned by the lack of due process,” CONCACAF said in a statement.

The Kuala Lumpur-based Asian Football Confederation said it was “disappointed that a matter of such significance entered the public domain before the AFC family had been afforded the opportunity to examine and discuss it.”

Continental bodies that organise their own international club and national team competitions – such as the Champions League, European Championship and Copa America – likely will see threats to those events from FIFA wanting to increase revenue and value for investors by playing World Cups and Club World Cups for men and women more often.

If the FIFA Forward Enterprise subsidiary is approved by a majority of the 211 members, they are each promised $20m in funding from the four-year commercial cycle tied to the men’s 2030 World Cup.

That would lead, Infantino wrote, to “a pool of diverse international investors” joining Joshua Kushner’s Thrive as the anchor investor. “This process will be led by J.P. Morgan,” his letter said.

If Infantino’s plan is rejected, those members will get their previously promised $10m over the next four years, the letter stated.

FIFA’s plan met quick opposition from British Prime Minister Andy Burnham, whose government is preparing to support hosting the 2035 Women’s World Cup in England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland. FIFA is to confirm that lone bid for 2035 at an online meeting in November.

“Football does not belong to investors,” Burnham, a longtime football fan, said in a video message on Instagram. “Once you have sold a piece of [the World Cup], you have sold out. Football belongs to the fans. It always has, and it always will.”

Resistance by British lawmakers – including threats of legislation by then-Prime Minister Boris Johnson in 2021 – previously helped stop the divisive European Super League project that was criticised as an existential threat to UEFA’s Champions League and which Infantino had discreetly supported.

The dust has barely settled on the expanded 48-team FIFA World Cup 2026, yet further development of the competition’s future has already been mooted, as well as struck by a fierce backlash.

The shine on the trophy, now held by Spain after their defeat of Argentina in the final, still glitters brightly, but there were tarnishes to this year’s event.

Now, the game’s global governing body, FIFA, and its president, Gianni Infantino, face yet more criticism after a plan was released to sell stakes in future World Cups and other events to private investors.

From European football’s governing body, UEFA, to the United Kingdom’s new prime minister, Andy Burnham, FIFA’s plan has been slammed. There has even been a suggestion of a boycott by UEFA.

Al Jazeera Sport takes a look at what the latest proposals on FIFA’s desk mean.

What are Gianni Infantino and FIFA’s new World Cup plans?

FIFA announced plans on Tuesday to sell stakes in future World Cups and other events to private investors in a bid to maximise revenue for the sport.

The proposal is to create a $20bn subsidiary to run the World Cup and other events.

FIFA says it would retain the majority share of a newly created FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) scheme, meaning it would still preside over football governance, competitions, match calendars and regulatory and sporting decisions.

Minority stakes, however, would be sold to external investors to raise up to $4.2bn as part of the new proposal.

Why do Infantino and FIFA want to sell stakes in the World Cup?

Debate raged for months in the build-up to World Cup 2026 that FIFA’s ticket pricing was pushing fans out of “the people’s game”, as it has long been regarded.

FIFA’s defence was that the World Cup is their main source of income to support the game around the globe – from the sport’s grassroots to the administration of the major international events.

This latest proposal is FIFA’s attempt to stretch that revenue potential even further.

How would the new plan for the FIFA World Cup work?

Billions of dollars are already raised by FIFA tournaments, largely from broadcasting rights, sponsorship and other commercial deals.

This new commercial subsidiary, the FFE, would extend beyond traditional means of raising funds and would be akin to the franchise model that many sports have now turned to.

The Indian Premier League (IPL), a T20 cricket tournament, was one of the first competitions to fully exploit the potential of franchise models, selling stakes in teams in a newly formed competition.

On Wednesday, the IPL – only formed in 2008 – announced its value had soared more than 11% this year to 20.6bn.

Teams in that competition are owned by majority investors, who therefore hold significant sway in how it is run.

Other models, including The Hundred of the England and Wales Cricket Board (ECB) – an attempt to rival the IPL – have sold minority ownership of the teams.

ECB, as a result, retains control of the competition, and this is what FIFA is proposing for the share of the World Cup and its events that it intends to sell privately.

Nonetheless, a share is a share and new investors, be it in cricket’s The Hundred or in the FIFA World Cup, will expect at the very least to be heard when it comes to decision-making.

This is where concerns are being raised about the proposals.

Who are the potential investors in the World Cup and other FIFA events?

Thrive Eternal, a United States venture capital firm, has been put forward to lead the proposed investor group, FIFA said.

The vehicle was founded by Joshua Kushner, the brother of US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.

Any potential investors would thereafter buy into the FIFA events via Thrive Eternal.

What benefits are FIFA claiming if the World Cup and events plan succeeds?

FIFA has said all net benefits will be reinvested in football, and that all countries should benefit from the ever-increasing profitability of the sport.

“Football is the world’s most popular sport,” FIFA President Gianni Infantino said in a statement.

“Parts of the game have turned that popularity into remarkable commercial value – and we celebrate that success and want it to continue, because it lifts the whole game.

“Our job is to make sure the rest of football grows with it: FIFA exists to support sustainable, inclusive development in every corner of the world.”

‘It is not FIFA’s to sell’: UEFA and UK PM reaction to Infantino’s World Cup plan?

FIFA has already clashed with domestic and continental governing bodies during World Cup 2026. The European powerhouse, UEFA, was the first to speak out against the new proposals.

“This crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross,” UEFA said.

“UEFA takes it extremely seriously. So should every National Football Association. So should every stakeholder who cares about the future of the game.

“The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade – especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”

Andy Burnham, who only replaced Keir Starmer as the United Kingdom’s prime minister last week, wrote on X: “Let me say this very directly. Football does not belong to investors. It belongs to the people who fill the stands and who stand on the touchline week in, week out, rain or shine.

“The World Cup is not a product. It is the greatest competition in world sport, and it was never anyone’s to sell. Dress the deal up however you like. Once you have sold a piece of it, you have sold out.

“Football belongs to the fans. It always has, and it always will,” he added.

The Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football (CONCACAF) said on Wednesday that it ⁠had not been informed of FIFA’s proposed sale of equity to outside investors and was “deeply concerned” over a lack of due process.

What will happen next for FIFA’s World Cup plans, and will UEFA boycott?

Any change will need to be voted through by FIFA’s 211-country membership.

Of that number, 55 nations fall within UEFA’s governance.

The European body will hold an emergency meeting later this week to discuss the proposals.

Were FIFA to implement such a plan, one possible response UEFA could take would include a boycott of FIFA competitions.

Although at just above a quarter of FIFA membership, Europe has produced the winner of six of the last eight World Cups.

Argentina and Brazil are the only teams to prevent a clean sweep by the Europeans in that time, and, indeed, are the only nations outside Europe to win the World Cup since fellow South Americans Uruguay won their second and last title in 1950.

What were the main criticisms of FIFA World Cup 2026?

The main criticism going into the 2026 World Cup, held in the US, Canada and Mexico, was pricing. From tickets to transport links, it was felt that football fans on median salaries around the world were being priced out of the game.

During the World Cup, the decision to suspend a red card shown to USA striker Folarin Balogun “undermined the game’s integrity and credibility,” according to UEFA.

US President Donald Trump said he called Infantino about the ban that Balogun faced – the forward lined up for USA in their next match against Belgium.

FIFA also faced a backlash over hydration breaks that were introduced midway through each half of those matches. Critics said the breaks functioned primarily as commercial opportunities for broadcasters and disrupted the traditional flow of football matches at the tournament.

Football’s world governing body announces plans to sell stakes of up to 20 percent in the World Cup and other events.

FIFA has proposed a plan to sell stakes in the World Cup and other events to private investors, provoking a furious response from the European football governing body, UEFA.

Under the plans announced by FIFA on Tuesday, a $20bn subsidiary would be created to run the World Cup and other events.

World football’s governing body said it would retain a majority share in the new FIFA Forward Enterprise, offering minority stakes to external investment to raise up to $4.2bn.

The plan still needs to be voted on by FIFA’s 211 member nations.

If successful, the proposed investor group is expected to be led by a vehicle founded by Joshua Kushner, the brother of US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, FIFA said.

UEFA said the proposal “crosses a line that football’s governing institutions should never cross”.

Reinvested in the game

FIFA has just held a 48-team World Cup across the United States, Canada and Mexico – the biggest in the tournament’s history.

It is one of the world’s wealthiest sporting organisations, generating billions of dollars, largely from broadcasting rights, sponsorship and other commercial deals linked to the World Cup.

But it says this proposal can increase funds to widen access to the sport and strengthen global participation, with all net benefits to be reinvested in football.

“Football is the world’s most popular sport,” FIFA President Gianni Infantino said in a statement.

“Parts of the game have turned that popularity into remarkable commercial value – and we celebrate that success and want it to continue, because it lifts the whole game.

“Our job is to make sure the rest of football grows with it: FIFA exists to support sustainable, inclusive development in every corner of the world.”

FIFA said that in addition to retaining sole control of the subsidiary, it would retain authority over football governance, competitions, match calendars and regulatory and sporting decisions.

‘World Cup is not a product’

The proposal deepens the divide between FIFA and UEFA, with Europe positioning itself as football’s custodian, while FIFA, a not-for-profit organisation, says it is focused on broadening access with financial largesse.

In a statement, UEFA said it takes the new proposals “extremely seriously”.

“So should every National Football Association. So should every stakeholder: leagues, clubs, players, supporters, governments and everyone who cares about the future of the game.

“The soul and governance of football are not assets to trade – especially with zero transparency as to who gains financially. None of us are the owners of football. It is not FIFA’s to sell.”

The United Kingdom’s new prime minister, Andy Burnham, joined critics, saying on social media that the sport does not belong to investors.

“The World Cup is not a product. It is the greatest competition in world sport, and it was never anyone’s to sell,” Burnham wrote on X.

“Dress the deal up however you like. Once you have sold a piece of it, you have sold out.”

As the FIFA World Cup 2026 reached its final week, Gourav Roy, an Indian software engineer living in San Francisco, drove more than 9,650 kilometres (6,000 miles) across the United States to attend both the semifinals and the final.

For Roy, it was the next best thing to what he had grown up dreaming of: seeing India play in the World Cup.

But the possibility of that dream coming true is looking ever more distant as deep-rooted systemic issues and the failure to implement reforms have left the country of 1.45 billion ranked a lowly 138th in the world, failing to even qualify for the 2027 Asian Cup.

“I’ve learned to love without expectation. That’s the burden of the Indian football fan,” said Roy.

While countries with tiny populations like Curacao and Cape Verde qualified for the 2026 World Cup, India remains a prime example of wasted potential in the planet’s most popular sport.

Those working in Indian football say the problems range from poor youth development systems, a lack of popularity, and a national federation (the All India Football Federation) struggling to implement a uniform vision with a loose patchwork of state associations.

“If you ask me, to clean up the system and reorganise it will take a full cycle of four years,” Ravi Puskur, the CEO of Indian Super League (ISL) club FC Goa, told Reuters.

“Then it’s another 20-25 years to get us to the World Cup.”

Confined to pockets

In cricket-mad India, football remains popular only in a handful of states like West Bengal, Goa, Kerala, Mizoram and Manipur.

The ISL, launched in 2014 with the backing of Reliance Industries, one of India’s biggest conglomerates, tried to change that with limited success.

In 2025, the AIFF and Reliance did not renew their partnership as negotiations stalled amid a Supreme Court case to implement a new constitution for the federation.

This year, under new management led by clubs, the ISL is yet to finalise a broadcaster and announce fixtures.

NorthEast United CEO Mandar Tamhane, who previously led Bengaluru FC, said clubs alone cannot fix Indian football.

“You’re talking about the government, corporate India… it has to be a collective effort,” he said.

“The federation has to make sure the clubs, state associations, the corporates and other stakeholders all work together.”

Weak youth development

AIFF executive committee member and Mizoram’s sports minister Lalnghinglova Hmar said the government can help with infrastructure, but for Indian football to improve, the country’s youth development system needs a drastic overhaul.

“In South Korea and Japan, kids play over 40 competitive matches per season. This is missing in India,” he said.

“We start developing players too late. Most under-15 players get only 12 to 15 competitive games yearly. Some get called up to the youth national camp after playing less than 20 competitive games.

“We’re short on qualified coaches. Many states don’t even have a youth league… we just can’t compete like that.”

But India’s size, the very thing that makes it an attractive sports market and led to the huge success of cricket’s Indian Premier League, also makes it difficult for the AIFF to implement widespread reforms.

“If even half the states were doing a proper job at grassroots, things would grow,” Hmar added.

The uncertainty over the ISL, which forced some teams to suspend player salaries last year, also dealt a blow to the clubs’ development programmes.

“If you can provide stability, gradually the investment will increase,” Puskur said.

A limited window

With India bidding to host the 2036 Olympics, the government is considering the launch of a “sports passport” that allows Indian-origin athletes to represent the country.

The AIFF leadership has backed the initiative, believing it will help improve the national team’s performances. But the proposal is still far from becoming law, and Hmar said Indian football needs to act fast.

“The other nations aren’t sitting idle… if we don’t match them, even if we improve, we will remain where we are,” he said.

While Indian football hangs in limbo, fans like Roy can only live in hope.

“They are talking about a 64-team World Cup,” he said. “It won’t gift us anything, but more places mean more hope.”