Argentina and Mexico Join Latest Wave of Support for Infantino Amid FIFA Turmoil

The football federations of Argentina and Mexico have become the newest members of a growing chorus of national associations publicly backing FIFA President Gianni Infantino, even as his controversial proposal to sell a stake in the World Cup commercial arm continues to generate fierce opposition. Their statements arrive just hours after the FIFA Management Board issued a formal declaration of "full support" for Infantino, reaffirming confidence in his leadership despite the recent abandonment of the investment plan that sparked a global outcry. The African football confederation (CAF), a long‑standing ally of the Swiss‑born president, also reiterated its endorsement in a unanimous resolution, thanking Infantino for his contributions to African football and echoing the language of the FIFA board’s statement.

In a letter addressed to Infantino, the Argentine Football Association (AFA) highlighted a decade of work that, in its view, has been anchored in the worldwide development of the sport and built on a governance framework described as clear, stable and transparent. The Mexican Football Federation (FMF), meanwhile, broke with its regional body CONCACAF by openly supporting the president, a move that underscores the deepening split within the football community over the issue.

Critics, however, remain unconvinced. The opposition’s argument centres on the procedural flaws of the proposed World Cup stake sale, which was introduced without consulting the 211 national associations that make up FIFA.

The plan promised a £30.1 million incentive to secure backing, but the deadline was set at less than a month, leaving little time for thorough debate. When the scheme was finally withdrawn on August 1, the backlash had already intensified, with senior figures such as Arsène Wenger, FIFA’s chief of global football development, publicly distancing themselves, and Carlos Cordeiro, Infantino’s senior adviser, resigning and labeling the venture a "bad deal" and "irresponsible." The mechanics of removing Infantino from office are now a central focus of the controversy.

According to FIFA statutes, an Emergency Congress can be convened if at least 20 percent of member associations – that is, 43 of the 211 – call for it. At such a congress, a vote of no confidence could be held, and a simple majority of 106 votes would be required to oust the president.

The distribution of voting power across the six confederations therefore becomes crucial. UEFA, representing European football, controls a substantial bloc of votes and must decide whether to rally enough support to reach the magic number before an Emergency Congress is called.

If UEFA hesitates, Infantino could survive a confidence vote and further consolidate his position. Within FIFA’s own governance structures, the FIFA Council also offers a pathway to removal.

The council comprises 37 members, nine of whom are from UEFA. Should a sufficient number of council members agree, they could convene an emergency meeting and pass a no‑confidence resolution, effectively forcing Infantino out without the need for a full congress. Beyond the institutional arena, the players’ union FIFPRO has entered the fray, condemning what it describes as a "cover‑up" surrounding the stake‑sale saga.

In a strongly worded statement, FIFPRO expressed "deep concern" over FIFA’s handling of the proposal and warned that any attempts to brand legitimate scrutiny as disloyalty would only exacerbate the crisis. Representing more than 70,000 professional footballers through 70 national unions, FIFPRO reminded the world that the integrity of the sport depends on transparent and accountable leadership. The opposition is not limited to players and African officials.

In recent days, the English FA announced it would withdraw its support for Infantino’s re‑election, slated for March 2027. England’s senior defender Lucy Bronze echoed UEFA’s stance, calling for a boycott of FIFA competitions if the president remains in charge, arguing that protecting the long‑term health of the game outweighs short‑term interests. Similarly, Norway’s football federation president Lise Klaveness, known for her principled positions on issues such as the Qatar and Saudi Arabia World Cups, publicly demanded Infantino’s resignation, a sentiment echoed by former FIFA chief Sepp Blatter, who has recently expressed interest in leading the Norwegian body. UEFA itself was the first continental confederation to openly condemn the proposal, threatening a complete boycott of FIFA tournaments unless the plan was withdrawn and concrete assurances were given that similar attempts would never recur.

The European body’s statement made clear that the conditions for participation – the retraction of the commercial‑rights sale and guarantees of future governance integrity – had not been met, and it reaffirmed a loss of confidence in Infantino’s presidency. The upcoming FIFA U‑20 Women’s World Cup, scheduled for next month, will serve as a litmus test for UEFA’s boycott. England’s squad, selected on Wednesday, will compete under the shadow of a potential European withdrawal from FIFA events, highlighting how the dispute is already affecting on‑field competition. Despite the mounting pressure, Infantino has so far weathered calls for his resignation, offering apologies for the "mistakes" associated with the failed investment plan.

After a seven‑hour crisis meeting in Morocco, the FIFA Management Board, including Secretary‑General Mattias Grafström, reiterated their "full support" for the president, even as they acknowledged the plan’s shortcomings. The pair later appeared together watching a Women’s AFCON match in Rabat, a moment that drew criticism from observers who saw it as tone‑deaf.

Chronologically, the controversy unfolded rapidly: - July 28: FIFA unveiled the "FIFA Forward Enterprise" plan, proposing to spin off World Cup commercial rights. - July 28: UEFA launched a public attack, accusing FIFA of rushing the proposal without adequate consultation. - July 30: UEFA’s 55 member associations voted to boycott the World Cup if the plan proceeded. - July 31: Infantino’s adviser Carlos Cordeiro resigned, labeling the deal "irresponsible." - August 1: FIFA withdrew the plan after intense opposition; UEFA declared loss of confidence in Infantino.

- August 3: Wales became the first association to formally withdraw support for Infantino’s re‑election. - August 5: Former star Luis Figo joined the chorus demanding the president step down. - August 6: FIFPRO condemned the "abuse of presidential power" and called for structural reform. - August 7: Argentina, Mexico and several African federations announced their continued backing of Infantino.

The saga remains unresolved, and the next weeks will determine whether the magic number of 106 votes can be assembled to unseat the embattled president or whether the coalition of supporters, including the newly added Argentine and Mexican federations, will keep him in place. The outcome will shape the governance of world football for years to come, influencing everything from commercial rights to the very credibility of FIFA as the sport’s global steward.