UEFA has warned FIFA that it may pursue legal avenues over Gianni Infantino’s aborted plan to sell a portion of World Cup revenues. In a formal letter dated July 31, the European governing body told Infantino it is "actively evaluating the possibility of legal action, arbitration, and/or regulatory complaints" concerning the now‑scrapped initiative. The correspondence also cautioned senior FIFA officials to preserve any documents or data that could become evidence in future proceedings.
The letter arrives amid a growing crisis of confidence in Infantino’s stewardship after the botched attempt to monetize World Cup stakes. The English Football Association is preparing to rescind its earlier endorsement of his re‑election. A new letter to Infantino will explicitly withdraw the FA’s prior support, signalling a coordinated European effort to pressure the FIFA president into stepping down as swiftly as possible. The Welsh FA was the first national association to publicly pull its backing for Infantino’s candidacy, and its Swedish counterpart followed suit on the subsequent Monday.
Analysts expect a cascade of similar statements from other federations in the coming days, all designed to amplify the pressure on the incumbent. The objective is clear: to create a united front that makes it politically untenable for Infantino to remain in office. Despite the mounting opposition, Infantino has shown no indication that he intends to resign under a cloud of disgrace.
Instead, he has been reaching out to the federations that continue to support him—primarily those in Africa, Asia, and South America—in an attempt to shore up his position. Even if he manages to survive the immediate storm, it is highly likely that he will face at least one challenger in the FIFA presidential election scheduled for March in Morocco.
A spokesperson for the United States government refuted a New York Post report claiming that Infantino was slated to speak with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday in a bid to preserve his job.
Rubio had previously attended the opening match of the World Cup in Los Angeles alongside Infantino in June. The Post also alleged that Infantino had been trying, without success, to contact former President Donald Trump by phone since the previous Friday. Both claims were denied by official sources.
Sky News sports correspondent Rob Harris offered an analysis of the unfolding drama. He described the series of statements and letters as an orchestrated attempt to build momentum and force Infantino out of his role. Earlier attempts, such as a European boycott of the World Cup announced on a Thursday, failed to compel decisive action. Harris noted that the situation represents a dramatic fall from grace for Infantino, especially considering that just two weeks earlier the world had celebrated the conclusion of the tournament.
Harris recalled being present in Wales in February when Infantino was hosted by the Football Association of Wales (FAW) for an International Football Association Board (IFAB) meeting. The FA and FAW hold two of the eight IFAB votes, giving them considerable influence over the laws of the game. Their withdrawal of support therefore carries weight beyond mere symbolism. According to Harris, Infantino has not offered any meaningful contrition or pledged reforms that UEFA and other bodies deem necessary.
He has not publicly committed to transparency or to preventing similar covert deals in the future. Nevertheless, Infantino continues to enjoy backing from certain regions, notably Africa, the Middle East, Qatar, and Morocco.
He appears to be leveraging political goodwill from these allies, hoping to portray himself as still commanding a broad coalition despite the growing dissent. The significance of the FA’s reversal cannot be overstated.
Until now, the English FA had maintained a public stance of support for Infantino’s re‑election, even as questions about his governance and the failed sell‑off persisted. The recent withdrawal marks a decisive turning point, suggesting that the “final straw” has been reached. Observers are now watching to see whether a formal vote of no confidence will be triggered, whether Infantino will capitulate before the March election, or whether he will attempt to weather the storm as Sepp Blatter did eleven years ago before resigning in disgrace.
The original proposal, known as FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE), aimed to raise up to $4.2 billion (£3.1 billion) from external investors by selling minority, non‑controlling stakes in the new commercial vehicle. FIFA valued the entire enterprise at roughly $20 billion (£15 billion) and argued that the proceeds could fund more than $10 billion in football development projects over four years, pending approval from member associations.
The collapse of this plan has left a substantial funding gap and intensified scrutiny of Infantino’s financial strategies. Potential successors have begun to emerge in the public discourse.
Nasser Al‑Khelaifi, the president of Paris Saint‑Germain and a powerful figure on the UEFA executive committee, has been mentioned, though he has reportedly shown no interest in replacing Infantino. Former FIFA presidential candidate Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al‑Khalifa, now AFC president, also opposes the sell‑off and could be a contender.
Victor Montagliani, CONCACAF president, whose confederation recently hosted World Cup matches, publicly rejected the proposal as well. Perhaps the most intriguing hypothetical challenger is Aleksander Čeferin, UEFA president. Čeferin envisions a very different model for global football governance—one that would eliminate practices such as hydration breaks during matches, the FIFA Peace Prize, private jets owned by the federation, and the exorbitant $1 million World Cup ticket prices. While Čeferin has not expressed any explicit ambition to run for FIFA president, his contrasting philosophy makes him a focal point for critics of Infantino’s leadership.
In summary, the English FA’s decision to follow the Welsh FA in withdrawing support for Gianni Infantino underscores a rapidly consolidating European front aimed at ousting the FIFA president. Legal threats from UEFA, mounting political pressure, and the failure of the FIFA Forward Enterprise scheme have converged to create a precarious situation for Infantino. Whether he will step down voluntarily, be forced out by a vote of no confidence, or survive until the scheduled election in Morocco remains uncertain. What is clear is that the landscape of world football governance is undergoing a profound shift, and the outcome will shape the sport’s administrative future for years to come.