UEFA has signaled that it may pursue legal avenues, arbitration proceedings, or formal regulatory complaints in response to FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s aborted plan to sell minority stakes in the organization’s World Cup assets. In a letter dated July 31, addressed directly to Infantino, the European governing body warned that it is "actively considering legal action, arbitration, and/or regulatory complaints" concerning the now‑scrapped proposal.
The correspondence also cautioned senior officials within FIFA to preserve any documentation or evidence that could become relevant in future litigation. This warning underscores the seriousness with which UEFA views the matter and its intent to protect the integrity of the sport’s governance. The backdrop to this development is a growing loss of confidence in Infantino’s leadership following the botched attempt to commercialise World Cup stakes.
The English Football Association (FA) has announced that it will withdraw its earlier endorsement of Infantino’s re‑election, a move that signals a coordinated European effort to expedite his removal from office. The FA plans to send a formal letter rescinding its prior support, joining a wave of similar actions across the continent. The Welsh FA was the first association to publicly retract its backing of Infantino’s candidacy, and the Swedish FA followed suit shortly thereafter. These withdrawals are expected to be the first of many, as football federations across Europe prepare statements and letters aimed at increasing pressure on the FIFA president.
Despite the mounting criticism, Infantino has shown little inclination to step down. Instead, he has been reaching out to the federations that continue to back him—predominantly those in Africa, Asia and South America—in an attempt to shore up his position. Even if he manages to survive the immediate storm, analysts predict that he will face at least one challenger in the upcoming FIFA presidential election scheduled to be held in Morocco in March. A U.S.
government spokesperson has denied a New York Post report that claimed Infantino was scheduled to speak with U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio on Monday in an effort to secure his job. Rubio did attend the opening match of the World Cup in Los Angeles alongside Infantino in June, but there is no confirmation of a subsequent meeting. The Post also alleged that Infantino had been unsuccessfully trying to contact former President Donald Trump by phone since Friday, a claim that remains unverified.
Sky News sports correspondent Rob Harris offered his analysis, describing the recent UEFA statements as part of a broader strategy to build momentum and force Infantino out of office. He noted that earlier attempts, such as a European boycott declaration, failed to elicit the desired response from the FIFA president. Harris highlighted the significance of the FA and the Football Association of Wales (FAW) within the International Football Association Board (IFAB), which controls the laws of the game and holds two of its eight voting positions.
According to Harris, Infantino has not offered the contrition or concrete assurances that UEFA and other European bodies have demanded. He has not pledged to reform the opaque decision‑making processes that allowed the controversial sell‑off plan to be drafted in secrecy and then presented to football associations worldwide. Nevertheless, Infantino still enjoys support from several regions, notably Africa, the Middle East, Qatar, and Morocco.
He appears to be mobilising political allies and seeking endorsements that portray him as responsive to global concerns, even as he revises his proposals under pressure. The withdrawal of support by the FA marks a decisive turning point. For years, the FA had publicly backed Infantino’s re‑election, but the recent series of missteps has eroded that confidence. Observers now wonder whether a vote of no confidence will be triggered before the March election, or whether Infantino will resign voluntarily.
The last comparable scenario involved Sepp Blatter, who was forced out in disgrace after more than a decade at the helm. The original plan, 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 entity, which FIFA valued at roughly $20 billion (£15 billion). The proposal claimed that, with member‑association approval, the funds could generate more than $10 billion in development financing for football over four years.
The scheme was widely criticised for its lack of transparency and potential conflicts of interest. Sky Sports News chief correspondent Kaveh Solhekol noted that while powerful figures such as Paris Saint‑Germain president Nasser Al‑Khelaifi sit on the UEFA executive committee, there is no indication that Al‑Khelaifi intends to replace Infantino.
Other potential challengers include Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al‑Khalifa, the former runner‑up in the 2015 FIFA presidential election and current AFC president, who has publicly opposed the sell‑off. Victor Montagliani, president of CONCACAF, also rejected the proposal, despite CONCACAF’s historically close ties to Infantino. Aleksander Čeferin, the UEFA president, is frequently mentioned as a possible alternative. Čeferin advocates a very different vision for football governance—one that would eliminate practices such as mandatory hydration breaks, FIFA Peace Prizes, and the use of private jets for the president, and would likely see ticket prices for the World Cup reduced dramatically.
However, Čeferin has not expressed any explicit ambition to run for FIFA president. In summary, the situation remains fluid. Infantino is under unprecedented pressure from multiple fronts: European federations are mobilising legal and political tactics, regional allies are wavering, and the broader football community is demanding greater accountability. Whether this culminates in Infantino’s resignation, a forced vote of no confidence, or a contested election in Morocco remains to be seen.
What is clear is that the era of unchecked authority at the top of world football is being seriously challenged, and the outcome will shape the governance of the sport for years to come.