Fifa has withdrawn its contentious scheme to sell stakes in its flagship tournaments to private investors, president Gianni Infantino announced on Thursday, following a wave of global opposition from the sport’s regulatory authorities. The Swiss official said the proposal had “created divisions” that no longer served its intended purpose, and confirmed the plan would not proceed. The decision followed Uefa pledged to withdraw from World Cups if the investment went ahead, whilst other continental confederations including Concacaf and the Asian Football Confederation also voiced their opposition. Infantino had offered Fifa’s 211 member associations $40 million each to back the proposal, which would have allowed private investment in tournaments including the men’s and women’s World Cups.
The swift failure of Infantino’s bold plan
What started as an ambitious effort to reform Fifa’s financial structure collapsed with remarkable speed over the course of just days. Initially, Fifa had defiantly insisted that “nobody is selling football” and pledged to press ahead with the proposals in spite of rejection by Uefa and Concacaf. However, the escalating pressure from various continental confederations, coupled with internal criticism, proved untenable. Infantino’s standing deteriorated further when Carlos Cordeiro, his chief adviser on international strategy and governance, resigned in protest, describing the proposal as “a bad deal for football” that would “compromise football’s future”.
The scale of the criticism spread beyond football’s regulatory bodies into the political sphere, with UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham announcing Infantino “an unsuitable candidate” to lead the organisation. Even Fifa’s own leadership expressed dismay, with chief operating officer Kevin Lamour stating the administrative structure had been “given false information” about the initiative. The cancellation of the plan now leaves Infantino facing an unpredictable outlook as he attempts re-election for a fourth term as president at the Fifa Congress set for March, with his standing and credibility gravely harmed by the episode.
- Uefa decided to reject World Cups if plans moved forward
- Concacaf dismissed the plan with majority member association opposition
- Asian Football Confederation aligned itself with Uefa
- Senior adviser Carlos Cordeiro withdrew from involvement in the scheme
Why European institutions opposed the plan
The proposal to introduce private ownership in Fifa’s competitions posed a significant threat to the self-governance and revenue control of European football’s governing organisations. Uefa, which manages Europe’s most profitable football markets, understood that external investment would weaken its control of tournament structure and revenue distribution. The confederation’s decision to threaten a World Cup boycott made a strong statement that Europe’s football leadership would not tolerate private stakeholders gaining control over its top-tier tournaments. This position proved crucial in uniting the other continents to oppose the proposal.
Beyond Europe, confederations across Africa, Asia, and the Americas shared common concerns about relinquishing oversight of their tournaments to private investors with profit-driven motives. Concacaf, which had recently hosted the men’s World Cup, demonstrated particular resistance in its rejection, with sources suggesting that the overwhelming bulk of its member associations had grown distrustful in Infantino’s direction. The Asian Football Confederation’s declaration of solidarity with Uefa demonstrated that opposition transcended geographical boundaries. Together, these bodies represented the vast preponderance of world football’s organisational hierarchy, making Infantino’s position numerically unsustainable.
The mathematics of opposition
Infantino required backing from a majority of Fifa’s 211 member associations to get through the proposal through the organisation’s governance procedures. With Uefa’s 55 affiliated nations, Concacaf’s 41 affiliated associations, and the AFC’s 47 affiliated nations united in opposition, he faced a combined bloc of 143 member bodies accounting for around 68 percent of Fifa’s member base. This mathematical reality indicated the plan lacked any realistic pathway to approval, rendering further efforts pointless and harmful to his political standing to his leadership aspirations.
| Continental body | Member associations |
|---|---|
| Union of European Football Associations (Uefa) | 55 |
| Asian Football Confederation (AFC) | 47 |
| Confederation of North, Central America and Caribbean Association Football (Concacaf) | 41 |
| Confederation of African Football (CAF) | 54 |
| South American Football Confederation (CONMEBOL) | 10 |
Inside Fifa’s governance crisis
The collapse of Infantino’s personal investment proposal has uncovered significant divisions within Fifa’s leadership structure, demonstrating that the organisation’s own administration questioned the proposal’s legitimacy. Kevin Lamour, Fifa’s chief operating officer, formally announced that the organisation had been “deceived” about the initiative’s real scope and implications. This extraordinary admission from a senior figure within Fifa’s senior management weakened Infantino’s position and reputation at a pivotal juncture, suggesting the proposal had been advanced without sufficient internal oversight or transparency amongst the organisation’s own operational leadership.
The shelving of the proposal marks a significant setback for Infantino as he gears up for his re-election bid at the Fifa Congress set for March 2027. The opposition he faced was not merely outside opposition from member federations, but encompassed discord from within his own organizational framework. This internal discord has damaged his footing significantly, with sources revealing that trust in his leadership has declined markedly across multiple confederations and within Fifa itself. The convergence of internal criticism and external opposition has positioned him as politically vulnerable heading into the pivotal congress vote.
Disagreement from within the institution
Carlos Cordeiro, Infantino’s senior adviser on global strategy and governance, resigned in protest over the private investment proposal, delivering a scathing critique of the plan. Cordeiro characterised the proposal as “a bad deal for football” that would irresponsibly “pledge football’s future” for quick financial benefit. His resignation proved particularly significant given his prominent advisory role and closeness to Infantino, signalling that even trusted members of the president’s closest advisers harboured serious reservations about the direction of his leadership and strategic vision for the organisation.
The departure of Cordeiro and the open opposition from Lamour highlighted a concerning divide between Infantino’s strategic direction and the viewpoints of seasoned officials tasked with executing policy. These individuals held deep understanding of Fifa’s operations and governance structures, strengthening their reservations about the proposal’s feasibility and moral considerations. Their readiness to voice concerns in public, despite their high-ranking roles within the organisation, suggested the scheme had created agreement among working personnel that it posed genuine risks to football’s established governance framework and organisational credibility.
- Kevin Lamour claimed Fifa’s governing body had been “deceived” about the project’s scope
- Carlos Cordeiro resigned, calling the scheme a “bad deal for football”
- Key advisers publicly questioned whether the proposal served football’s long-term interests
What occurs next for Infantino
The withdrawal of the private investment scheme constitutes a notable strategic pullback for Infantino, yet it does little to resolve the fundamental crisis of confidence that now engulfs his tenure. With his re-election campaign for a fourth consecutive presidency poised to accelerate ahead of March’s Fifa Congress, the 56-year-old faces an steep challenge to restore unity amongst member associations. The episode has laid bare significant divisions within the international football landscape and demonstrated that even his most trusted confidants hold significant reservations about his strategic direction. His efforts to characterise the withdrawal as a move towards reconciliation ring hollow given the situation that compelled him to act.
Infantino’s statement that he intends to “gather all interested parties back together in the days and weeks ahead” suggests an recognition that significant negotiation efforts lies ahead. However, the harm caused by the proposal and how it was handled has already altered perceptions of his presidency amongst key stakeholders. The backing of leading confederations—particularly Uefa, Concacaf, and the AFC—will prove essential for his chances of re-election. Without demonstrable efforts to restore confidence and demonstrate genuine consultation with member associations, Infantino’s path to a fourth term could prove considerably more contested than his previous electoral victories.
The route to March’s Congress
The Fifa Congress in March marks a pivotal moment for Infantino’s leadership prospects. Member associations will scrutinise not only his management of the proposed investment but his broader vision for governance of football. The combination of internal resignations, confederation opposition, and international political criticism has created an unparalleled test to his authority. How effectively he rebuilds relationships with regional confederations and demonstrates renewed commitment to collaborative governance will establish whether he obtains majority backing required for re-election or faces a real threat to his ongoing tenure.