Fifa has withdrawn its controversial scheme to sell stakes in its major competitions to private investors, president Gianni Infantino announced on Thursday, after a wave of global opposition from football’s governing bodies. The Swiss official said the proposal had “created divisions” that no longer fulfilled its intended purpose, and verified the plan would not proceed. The decision came after Uefa pledged to withdraw from World Cups if the investment proceeded, whilst other continental confederations including Concacaf and the Asian Football Confederation also expressed their concerns. Infantino had offered Fifa’s 211 member associations $40 million each to back the proposal, which would have enabled private investment in tournaments including the men’s and women’s World Cups.
The rapid failure of Infantino’s bold plan
What started as an ambitious attempt to modernise Fifa’s monetary system unravelled with astonishing swiftness across just days. Initially, Fifa had firmly declared that “nobody is selling football” and pledged to press ahead with the proposals in spite of rejection by Uefa and Concacaf. However, the mounting pressure from several continental bodies, alongside damaging internal dissent, proved untenable. Infantino’s position weakened further when Carlos Cordeiro, his senior adviser on global strategy and governance, stepped down in protest, describing the proposal as “a bad deal for football” that would “jeopardise football’s future”.
The extent of the opposition extended beyond football’s governing structures into the political arena, with UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham openly stating Infantino “the wrong man” to direct the organisation. Even Fifa’s own management voiced concern, with COO Kevin Lamour stating the governing body had been “misled” about the project. The cancellation of the project now leaves Infantino dealing with an unpredictable outlook as he pursues re-election for a fourth term as president at the Fifa Congress scheduled for March, with his authority and standing seriously undermined by the episode.
- Uefa voted to boycott World Cups if plans moved forward
- Concacaf dismissed the plan with widespread opposition from member associations
- Asian Football Confederation expressed support with Uefa
- High-ranking official Carlos Cordeiro resigned over the scheme
Why European institutions opposed the plan
The proposal to privatise stakes in Fifa’s competitions seriously undermined the independence and financial standing of football’s continental governing bodies. Uefa, which oversees Europe’s most profitable football markets, acknowledged that private capital would weaken its authority regarding competition format and financial allocation. The confederation’s move to announce a World Cup withdrawal demonstrated resolve that Europe’s football establishment would refuse to accept external shareholders taking control of its top-tier tournaments. This position proved decisive in rallying the other continents to oppose the plan.
Beyond Europe, confederations across Africa, Asia, and the Americas shared common concerns about ceding authority of their tournaments to private financial interests with profit-seeking agendas. Concacaf, which had just staged the men’s World Cup, demonstrated particular resistance in its rejection, with sources revealing that the vast majority of its constituent members had lost confidence in Infantino’s leadership. The Asian Football Confederation’s statement of support with Uefa showed that opposition crossed regional divides. Together, these bodies comprised the dominant share of world football’s administrative framework, making Infantino’s position mathematically untenable.
The mathematics of resistance
Infantino required support from a majority of Fifa’s 211 member nations to pass the plan through the organization’s decision-making processes. With Uefa’s 55 members, Concacaf’s 41 members, and the AFC’s 47 members aligned against it, he faced a combined bloc of 143 member bodies representing around 68 per cent of Fifa’s member base. This mathematical reality meant the plan had no any genuine route to approval, making continued pursuit futile and politically damaging to his presidential ambitions.
| 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 leadership crisis
The breakdown of Infantino’s private investment scheme has uncovered deep fractures within Fifa’s organisational hierarchy, demonstrating that the organisation’s own management questioned the proposal’s credibility. Kevin Lamour, Fifa’s COO, publicly stated that the organisation had been “deceived” about the project’s true nature and consequences. This remarkable statement from a senior figure within Fifa’s leadership structure weakened Infantino’s authority and credibility at a crucial time, implying the proposal had been promoted without sufficient internal oversight or transparency amongst the organisation’s own management team.
The abandonment of the proposal represents a major blow for Infantino as he prepares for his candidacy at the Fifa Congress set for March 2027. The opposition he faced was not merely external pressure from member associations, but involved dissent from within his own administrative apparatus. This internal rift has undermined his standing considerably, with sources suggesting that confidence in his leadership has diminished significantly across various confederations and within Fifa itself. The combination of internal dissent and external resistance has left him politically vulnerable moving towards the crucial congress vote.
Opposition from inside the organization
Carlos Cordeiro, Infantino’s principal consultant on worldwide strategic planning and oversight, resigned in protest over the private investment proposal, presenting a harsh evaluation of the scheme. Cordeiro portrayed the proposal as “a bad deal for football” that would recklessly “jeopardise football’s long-term prospects” for short-term financial gain. His resignation carried particular weight given his high-profile advisory position and proximity to Infantino, suggesting that even loyal figures of the president’s inner circle maintained grave doubts about the trajectory of his leadership and strategic vision for the organisation.
The exit of Cordeiro and the open opposition from Lamour highlighted a troubling disconnect between Infantino’s strategic direction and the viewpoints of seasoned officials tasked with executing policy. These individuals held intimate knowledge of Fifa’s organisational frameworks and governance systems, lending credibility to their reservations about the proposal’s feasibility and ethical implications. Their willingness to speak out publicly, despite their senior positions within the body, indicated the scheme had generated consensus amongst operational staff that it presented real dangers to the sport’s existing governance structures and organisational credibility.
- Kevin Lamour asserted Fifa’s governing body had been “deceived” about the scope of the project
- Carlos Cordeiro departed, labelling the scheme a “bad deal for football”
- Key advisers openly challenged whether the proposal supported football’s long-term prospects
What comes next for Infantino
The abandonment of the commercial funding initiative represents a notable strategic pullback for Infantino, yet it fails to address the fundamental crisis of confidence that now engulfs his leadership. 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 uphill battle to rebuild cohesion among member associations. The episode has laid bare deep fractures within the global football community and demonstrated that even his most trusted confidants harbour serious doubts about his strategic approach. His efforts to characterise the withdrawal as a gesture towards unity ring hollow given the circumstances that forced his hand.
Infantino’s statement that he intends to “unite all interested parties into alignment in the days and weeks ahead” suggests an acknowledgment 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 among major figures. The backing of leading confederations—particularly UEFA, Concacaf, and the AFC—will prove essential for his re-election prospects. Without concrete actions to restore confidence and show real engagement with member associations, Infantino’s route to a fourth mandate could be significantly more competitive than his previous electoral victories.
The path to March’s Congress
The Fifa Congress in March marks a pivotal moment for Infantino’s leadership prospects. Member associations will examine not only his management of the investment proposal but his broader vision for football governance. The combination of departures from within, confederation opposition, and international political criticism has created an unprecedented challenge to his authority. How successfully he mends relationships with confederations across regions and displays renewed dedication to collaborative governance will determine whether he gains the support of the majority necessary for reelection or confronts a genuine challenge to his ongoing tenure.