'At least I'll sleep well tonight' - Fifa executive joins Burnham in questioning Infantino

Fifa says ‘nobody selling football’ as plan continues
Courting controversy and befriending Trump – the story of Fifa boss Infantino
Why women’s football is first casualty of Fifa plans

The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) had earlier mentioned it “stands in solidarity” with counterparts in Europe and North, Central America and the Caribbean.

The AFC added Infantino’s plan could not “realistically achieve the necessary broad consensus and unity required to move forward”.

“The Fifa World Cup is the pinnacle of global football and derives its strength from the participation of all Confederations and the world’s leading football nations,” it mentioned.

“Any proposal that risks undermining the unity and universal character of the competition must be reconsidered.”

Shortly after that statement, Carlos Cordeiro – Infantino’s senior adviser on global strategy and governance – resigned, saying the proposal was “a bad deal for football” and would “mortgage football’s future”.

Burnham later described Infantino’s proposal as an “outrageous suggestion”.

“The idea that it could even be brought forward shows that, in my view, [he] is the wrong man to lead the organisation,” he added.

The AFC’s statement means Infantino’s plans are unlikely to be approved by Fifa members if put to a vote.

Infantino had indicated the proposals would need a straight majority to go through – meaning 106 of its 211 members needed to vote in favour for the proposal.

Uefa – the body that governs European football – has 55 votes. Concacaf, which oversees football in North, Central America and the Caribbean, has 35 and Asia has 46.

Should all member associations back the stance of their governing body, that would mean 136 nations are against Infantino’s plan.

What are Infantino’s plans?

Fifa and Infantino want to create a commercial subsidiary to run its main events, including its World Cups, and external investors will be able to buy stakes in it.

It mentioned it would “invite third parties to make minority, non-controlling investments” in a new subsidiary – Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE).

In a 25-page document created by investment bank JP Morgan, it is made clear Fifa’s tournaments would expand to hit an estimated increased pay-out of 24m euros per member association in the 2035-2039 cycle.

It mentions “new business initiatives” and “attracting top talent with incentive-driven compensation”.

The World Cup is described in it as the “most widely viewed” sporting event but Fifa, by contrast, is mentioned to be “under-monetised”.

There is no mention in the document of the women’s game.

If approval is granted, Fifa says Thrive Eternal is expected to lead the proposed investor group for FFE.

Thrive is an American venture capital firm founded by Joshua Kushner – the brother of US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared.

‘If I lose my job, so be it – at least I’ll sleep well’

As chief operating officer, Lamour is two layers of management below Infantino.

In his – which has been seen by BBC Sport – Lamour mentioned “what has been unveiled in recent days and what has been happening behind the scenes in recent months defies belief and imagination”.

“It is becoming increasingly difficult for Fifa’s administration to work under these conditions and fulfil its mission,” he wrote.

“I have no authority to speak on behalf of my colleagues, and perhaps I am mistaken. But my feeling is that we all want to be proud to work for Fifa, and today, unfortunately, it seems that is no longer the case for many of us.

“I know I have a duty of loyalty to my employer. But I also, and above all, have a duty of loyalty to certain values and to support my colleagues.”

Lamour joined Fifa in November 2024, having previously served as deputy general secretary at Uefa.

Cordeiro, meanwhile, had been a Fifa senior adviser for four years and 11 months.

He represented the world governing body on the White House taskforce for the 2026 World Cup and was a former investment banker with Goldman Sachs.

Appointed in September 2021, he is the first senior figure at Fifa to resign over the plans.

In a lengthy statement, Cordeiro mentioned he “unequivocally” opposed the plans and mentioned he “did not accept the proposition” Fifa needed outside investors to “unlock greater value”.

“The proposal has become a defining question for Fifa’s future,” he wrote.

“Fifa’s responsibility is not to maximise commercial returns at any cost. It is to protect and strengthen football for future generations.

“When those principles come into conflict, football must come first.”

Cordeiro mentioned he had no involvement in this proposal.

“Most troubling of all is the absence of answers to fundamental questions,” he added. “Why this deal? Why now? What oversight exists? Who benefits?” he wrote.

“These questions remain largely unanswered, and yet member associations are being asked to make a decision of enormous consequence in barely 50 days or risk being left behind.

“That is not a responsible way to determine the future of the world’s game.”

What did the AFC say?

The AFC in their statement accused Fifa of setting the “direction of travel” for a “significant initiative” before consulting stakeholders.

It mentioned Fifa’s failure to consult its member associations on the proposals had “exposed fundamental weaknesses in Fifa’s consultation and decision-making processes that must now be addressed”.

The AFC also criticised Fifa for leaving “confederations, member associations and even Fifa’s own governing bodies, including the Fifa Council, feeling sidelined.”

It added: “The Fifa World Cup, and the game itself, belong to the entire global football family.

“Their future must always be shaped collectively, through institutions that reflect the voices of all Confederations and member associations.

“The AFC calls upon Fifa to undertake an urgent review of its governance and decision-making framework to ensure that proposals of global significance are developed through proper consultation, meaningful engagement and appropriate oversight by Fifa’s statutory bodies.”

Uefa to boycott World Cups if Fifa plans approved

What has been the reaction?

On Thursday, Uefa voted to boycott World Cups if the Fifa plan proceeded.

Hours later, Concacaf, which hosted this year’s World Cup, released a statement also rejecting the proposals made by Infantino.

Fifa released a statement early on Friday vowing to continue with the plan – but added “nobody is selling football”.

The governing body of world football claimed the consultation process had been “disrupted by incorrect media reports”.

It claimed that would “not come at the cost of either the spirit or the governance of Fifa or football itself”.

Uefa has accused Fifa of using football “to enrich themselves and their friends”, while Concacaf and AFC have both expressed concerns about consultation over the plans.

“The World Cup cannot be treated as an investment product,” Uefa’s statement on Thursday 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.

“No part of it should ever be surrendered to private investors. The World Cup is not for sale.

The governing body overseeing football in South America, Conmebol, is yet to publicly comment on the proposals. The governing bodies in Africa (CAF) and Oceania (OFC) have mentioned they will discuss Fifa’s plan in August.

Why ‘smaller’ nations could still support Infantino

While Uefa members are among the richest on the planet, many other nations rely on Fifa funding for basic infrastructure.

While the AFC opposes Infantino’s plan, unlike Uefa it has not threatened to boycott Fifa competitions. AFC members would not be obliged to vote against the proposals.

Rogers Byamukama, of the Ugandan Football Federation, argued any avenue that could lead to more resources for nations like his should be explored.

“First and foremost, you need to understand that football is a very expensive venture, especially on the African continent where the resources are not easy to come by,” he told Newsday on BBC World Service.

“For instance in Uganda, the number of infrastructure projects that have been funded by Fifa from the resources generated by Fifa, especially at the World Cup, both from ticket sales as well as sponsors.

“On top of that, there are many grassroots programmes that have been funded by Fifa, including schools for football.

“From my perspective, any avenue that brings in more resources is good because those resources would be distributed and given to federations, especially on the African continent and that would inspire growth.”

Byamukama acknowledged Uefa’s right to speak out, but suggested its members were not reliant on Fifa funding like many associations in the rest of the world where Infantino remains popular.

In the first two cycles of the Fifa Forward development programme, through to 2022, $2.8bn (£2.08bn) was made available for investment across the 211 member associations.

Fifa Forward 3.0 – covering the years 2023 through to 2026 – has produced a 30% increase in funding.

Fifa has provided a further $5m (£3.7m) for every member association, with another $60m (£44.48m) paid to each confederation for their own projects.

After expanding the men’s World Cup to 48 teams from 32 for the 2026 edition, Fifa is seeking an independent agency to assess an expansion to 64 teams for the 2030 tournament.

The timeline on documents seen by BBC Sport mentioned Fifa would receive agency proposals by 7 August, with a Fifa decision on 14 August. Delivery of analysis by the agency is then scheduled for 11 September.