• Four reasons why Fifa’s World Cup plan never stacked up

    • Published
      4 hours ago
  • Courting controversy and befriending Trump – the story of Fifa boss Infantino

    • Published
      6 hours ago
  • Infantino on the brink? Who might replace him if he goes?

    • Published
      6 hours ago

What did Uefa’s statement say?

Uefa had been highly critical of the proposals since they were first stated in the media on Tuesday.

In a powerful, lengthy statement released several hours after Fifa revealed it had scrapped the plans, Uefa stated:

  • it “cannot keep going on” with “secret schemes of fast-track timescales cooked up by faceless individuals and of dubious benefit to the game”.

  • those responsible for the plan should be identified and held to account.

  • it would devise a plan “with its associations and in close co-operation with other confederations” to make sure this “cannot occur again”.

  • it would work with partners to “propose a new way of distributing resources through the existing Fifa Forward programme”.

It also accused Infantino of “failing to use associations’ money for the benefit of the game”.

“We must start to use some of that money that is sat idle in Fifa’s bank account to deliver the kick-start that the grassroots and the wider game need,” the statement added.

“But we don’t need to sell off the family silver to pay for it.

“This is a victory for the whole game. But it must not be the end of the story.

“The proposal has gone. The task of rebuilding trust in Fifa has only just begun.”

Fifa has yet to respond to Uefa’s statement.

What did Concacaf’s statement say?

Concacaf, which hosted this year’s World Cup, was critical of the Fifa leadership without naming Infantino.

The governing body expressed concern at Infantino’s plans on Thursday, after Uefa had voted to boycott World Cups if the Fifa plan proceeded.

While they stopped short of expressing no confidence in the Swiss, Concacaf stated a “full review” of Fifa’s leadership should be undertaken.

Concacaf stated:

  • the “future of the FIFA World Cup, the greatest asset in world football, was advanced outside every established governance framework, without transparency, consultation or due process”.

  • the plans were a “symptom of leadership that has stopped putting football first”.

  • Fifa is “not a private enterprise. It is a body held in trust for the game and its members. Those appointed to serve it carry a fiduciary duty, a duty of service over power. Where that duty is not upheld, accountability cannot be optional”.

They added the unity demonstrated by its 41 member associations this week “reaffirmed that when guided by courage, integrity and sound governance, the game will remain where it belongs: in the hands of football – not a single individual”.

The Football Association stated it supports Uefa’s position, adding: “It is time for a full and robust review of Fifa’s leadership and governance to ensure that the global game is run transparently.”

Lise Klaveness, president of the Norwegian Football Federation, stated it was “reassuring to be part of a strong and united Uefa throughout this process”.

“We must acknowledge the entire framework of international football co-operation was unnecessarily put at risk in pursuit of individual interests rather than the best interests of the game,” a statement read.

“Going forward, all our efforts must be directed towards improving governance.

“This cannot end as merely another power struggle conducted behind closed doors or through bilateral discussions.”

‘Thunderous barrage of criticism from Uefa’

By

Simon Stone

Chief football news reporter

Any hope Infantino might have had of tiptoeing away from the scene of his World Cup private-investment wreckage with just minor damage to his reputation has been obliterated.

Uefa has gone straight for the Fifa president.

The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) couched its condemnation of Infantino – make no mistake, it is livid – in creative terms.

But Uefa’s statement is one of the most ferocious, possibly the most ferocious, ever aimed at the head of world football.

Words such as “shabby” and “secret schemes” speak for themselves.

It is fair to ask why football’s powerbrokers didn’t step in before now. There have been plenty of instances in the past few months alone when people have felt Fifa’s president seemed to be acting against the benefit of the wider game.

But that is a different question.

Uefa has now taken aim at Infantino with a thunderous barrage of criticism, condemnation and vicious questioning.

The damage to Infantino is severe and it doesn’t appear anyone is coming to help.

Figure caption,

How does Fifa actually make decisions?

How did the proposal fall apart?

The proposal – first stated in the media on Tuesday – was met with widespread criticism, with Uefa voting on Thursday to boycott World Cups if the plans went ahead.

European football’s governing body stated the World Cup “cannot be treated as an investment product”.

Two other major confederations then spoke out against the plans.

Concacaf, which governs football in North and Central America and the Caribbean – and hosted this summer’s World Cup – stated its members “rejected” the proposal, with sources saying the vast majority of associations from the region are losing, or have lost, faith in Infantino.

The AFC stated it stood in “solidarity” with Uefa and Concacaf, while Burnham stated Infantino was “the wrong man” to lead Fifa.

On Friday, Fifa’s chief operating officer Kevin Lamour stated the governing body’s own administration had been “deceived” about the project.

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

What were Infantino’s plans?

Fifa and Infantino wanted to create a commercial subsidiary to run its main events, including its World Cups, and external investors would have been able to buy stakes in it.

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

In a 25-page document created by investment bank JP Morgan, it was made clear Fifa’s tournaments would expand to hit an estimated increased payout of 24m euros (£20.5m) per member association in the 2035-39 cycle.

In the document, the World Cup was described as the “most widely viewed” sporting event but Fifa, by contrast, was stated to be “under-monetised”.

There was no mention of the women’s game.

Fifa stated Thrive Eternal was expected to lead the proposed investor group for FFE, had it been approved.

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

A report in the New York Post, which broke the story of the Fifa plan withdrawal, quoted an unnamed source saying the situation had become a “brand nightmare” for Kushner.

Related topics

  • Football
  • FIFA World Cup 2026

✔ today silver rate

✔ 2026 winter olympics

✔ chat gtp

✔ silver rate today

✔ silver rate today live

✔ 2030 winter olympics

Read More

Sports

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *