World football has united in rare fashion after FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s controversial proposal to sell a stake in the FIFA World Cup sparked an extraordinary global backlash, with Europe confirming it will boycott the sport’s biggest tournament if the plan proceeds.
The proposal would see FIFA sell a minority stake in a newly created commercial entity responsible for the World Cup and other major tournaments, with the organisation valuing the business at around US$20 billion.
Watch the biggest Aussie sports & the best from overseas LIVE on Kayo Sports | New to Kayo? Join now and get your first month for just $1.
The governing body says the investment would raise billions to fund football development around the world while allowing FIFA to retain control of the sport.
According to multiple reports, Thrive Capital founder Joshua Kushner – the brother of Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner – is expected to lead the investment group backing the proposal.
The World Cup is already the most profitable sporting competition on the planet, generating more than US$2 billion in profit from its most recent edition.
Yet FIFA is seeking further commercial investment, reportedly giving its 211 member associations just 53 days to vote on the proposal while informing them each federation would receive around US$20 million in development funding should the deal be approved.
Few journalists have covered the story more closely than The Times’ chief sports reporter Martin Ziegler, who was among the first to reveal FIFA’s plans.
In the wake of the extraordinary backlash, Ziegler wrote that Infantino had “opened Pandora’s box, flew too close to the sun, jumped the shark and just about every other idiom in the book.”
“The only question is how, or if, Infantino can extricate himself from a mess of his own making,” Ziegler wrote.
Hellas produce an all-time CUPSET | 01:00
He added that the FIFA president had “clearly totally underestimated the reaction his proposal, drawn up in secret using connections in the United States close to Donald Trump’s network, would provoke”.
No publication captured the mood more bluntly than The Telegraph’s Sports Investigations Reporter, Ben Rumsby, who described the proposal as “comically deranged”.
“We know the World Cup is the most profitable sporting entity on the planet,” the publication wrote.
“But Infantino – a man who, by comparison, makes his predecessor Sepp Blatter look a byword for decency and integrity – wanted more.
“Never mind that this last iteration made more than $2bn profit, he set his sights on becoming the Elon Musk of football administration.”
MORE FIFA NEWS
‘PURE BRIBERY’: Football Australia breaks silence on $40m World Cup shakedown
FIFA’s $29bn bombshell promises a huge slice for Australia: It could destroy the World Cup
‘NOT YOURS TO SELL’: WC plunged into turmoil over FIFA ‘nuclear bomb’
‘STAIN ON FOOTBALL’: FIFA boss attacks WC critics in ‘world class tantrum’
‘THE WORLD CUP IS NOT FOR SALE’
It cannot always be said that Europe’s football associations stand united. But there wasn’t a single voice of opposition during one of the most extraordinary meetings ever held between UEFA’s 55 member nations.
So many delegates wanted to have their say on Infantino’s proposal that an emergency summit scheduled for one hour lasted more than twice as long.
“More than 30 federations actually spoke,” one attendee told The Telegraph.
The Independent’s Miguel Delaney revealed just how remarkable the meeting became, reporting that UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin opened proceedings with a simple message that would echo throughout the next two hours.
“Enough is enough.”
According to Delaney, Ceferin stressed the dispute “isn’t about him and Gianni” and insisted he had never wanted a fight with FIFA before arguing the governing body already had all the money it would ever need.
The emergency meeting concluded with UEFA’s 55 member associations unanimously agreeing to a statement rejecting FIFA’s proposal in the strongest possible terms.
“The World Cup cannot be treated as an investment product,” the statement read.
“It is one of football’s greatest sporting legacies. It has been built over generations by players, national teams and supporters across every continent.
“The World Cup is not for sale.”
Co-signed by every European football association, including England’s Football Association, the statement accused FIFA of “a profound failure of leadership” and criticised what it described as “governance by intimidation”.
UEFA also labelled FIFA’s attempts to progress the proposal without meaningful consultation as both “irresponsible” and “indefensible”.
According to Delaney, England FA chair and FIFA vice-president Debbie Hewitt was the next major figure to speak, becoming the first official to raise the prospect of a boycott while criticising governance under Infantino’s leadership.
Spurs WIN down under on penalties | 01:30
The proposed boycott would apply to all FIFA competitions, not just the World Cup, significantly increasing the pressure on Infantino given much of FIFA’s commercial strategy is built around the value of European football.
Numerous officials at the meeting also questioned Infantino’s leadership, with his conduct described as everything from “dictatorship behaviour” to “not what you’d expect from a true leader”.
FIFA Executive Committee member Razvan Burleanu reportedly directly blamed Infantino for the crisis, while Football Association of Wales chief executive Noel Mooney questioned whether member associations could continue to have faith in the FIFA president despite acknowledging federations still required greater financial support.
According to The Telegraph’s Ben Rumsby, discussions then shifted to what insiders described as the “nuclear option”, a coordinated boycott of FIFA competitions should the proposal proceed.
One attendee said: “Everyone was clear that this thing was not in the best interests of the game.”
Another added: “To use this as a way to try to enrich people is a bit scary.”
Even Czech Republic football president David Trunda, who had spoken positively about elements of FIFA’s proposal only a day earlier, did not defend it during the meeting.
The publication noted it would require only football’s commercial heavyweights – England, Germany, Spain, France and Italy – to refuse to participate for the future of the World Cup to be thrown into turmoil.
OPPOSITION SPREADS
Europe was far from alone.
CONCACAF’s 41 member associations also rejected the proposal, while the Asian Football Confederation warned FIFA’s plans risked “undermining the very foundations of football”.
According to The Athletic’s Adam Crafton, one source familiar with the CONCACAF meeting said member associations were rapidly losing confidence in Infantino’s leadership.
“The feeling and discussion expressed among the vast majority of CONCACAF members was that they are losing confidence, or have lost confidence altogether, in Gianni Infantino as FIFA president.”
‘GO, GIANNI, GO!’
If The Telegraph questioned the logic behind the proposal, the Daily Mail’s Chris Wheeler questioned the man driving it.
“As every megalomaniac finds out in the end, there comes a point in the power trip when the writing is on the wall,” the publication wrote.
“For the deplorable Gianni Infantino, that moment arrived after UEFA’s 55 member associations made it clear they will not stand for FIFA’s plot to sell off the World Cup to the highest bidders.”
It continued with an even more direct message.
“If he had any shred of dignity, Infantino would get out long before football has the chance to kick him out.
“Go, Gianni, go!”
Even former FIFA president Sepp Blatter, himself no stranger to controversy, labelled the proposal “deeply damaging” to the game.
Wheeler seized on that irony.
“When you have gone too far even for a man like Blatter, you must know your moral compass is off.”
The backlash also comes after a series of controversial decisions during the 2026 World Cup.
Infantino drew criticism for introducing commercially driven hydration breaks, overseeing an extended halftime entertainment show during the final and suspending Folarin Balogun’s red-card ban after public lobbying from US President Donald Trump, allowing the striker to feature in the knockout stages.
Tournament sponsor Carlsberg even joined the criticism, posting on social media:
“Time for a hydration break, Gianni.”
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
Infantino has already declared his intention to seek another term as FIFA president when elections are held in Morocco in March 2027.
However, his grip on world football suddenly appears far less certain.
For years, Infantino has weathered criticism while steadily consolidating power within world football.
This time, however, the resistance appears fundamentally different.
Pedro hat-trick sinks wanderers | 02:30
What began as opposition to the proposed sale of a stake in the World Cup has evolved into broader questions over FIFA’s governance, transparency and Infantino’s leadership, with criticism stretching from federation presidents and FIFA executives to some of the most influential voices in world football.
Under Article 25 of FIFA’s statutes, just 20 per cent of member associations are required to call an extraordinary FIFA Congress and trigger a vote of no confidence.
There is also growing speculation over whether a challenger could emerge before next year’s election.
Martin Ziegler of The Times suggested Paris Saint-Germain president and European Club Association chairman Nasser Al-Khelaifi would be one of the few figures capable of uniting opposition to Infantino, although representatives have insisted he has no ambition to become FIFA president.
Whether that happens remains to be seen.
But after years of consolidating power, Infantino now finds himself facing something he has rarely encountered during his presidency: a football world that, for perhaps the first time, appears united against him.