FIFA president Gianni Infantino is facing growing criticism over his controversial proposal to sell stakes in the governing body’s competitions to private investors, with opposition continuing to build from football officials, regional confederations and political figures. The latest criticism came from FIFA’s own chief operating officer, Kevin Lamour, who issued a strongly worded statement questioning the proposal and calling on football leaders worldwide to carefully reconsider the direction of the organisation. Lamour described the initiative as “the project of one person,” suggesting it lacked broad institutional support. He also claimed that FIFA’s administration had been “deceived” regarding the proposal, adding that the time had come for football’s political leaders to ask difficult questions and make responsible decisions for the future of the sport. Although Lamour did not mention Infantino by name, his remarks were widely seen as a direct challenge to the FIFA president’s leadership. He stressed that the organisation’s employees remain committed to serving football rather than advancing the interests of any individual. “Our mission is to serve football,” Lamour said, adding that a FIFA president should unite people and inspire confidence rather than create division. He also acknowledged that speaking out could cost him his position but insisted he was prepared to accept the consequences in order to remain true to his principles. “If that means I lose my job, then so be it,” he said, adding that he would rather stand by his values than remain silent. The controversy intensified as the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) became the third continental governing body to publicly oppose the proposal. In a statement, the AFC expressed solidarity with UEFA and Concacaf, arguing that the plan lacks the broad consensus necessary for such a significant change to world football. The AFC warned that the FIFA World Cup derives its strength from the participation of all confederations and football nations, saying any proposal that threatens the tournament’s unity and universal character should be reconsidered. Further pressure emerged when Carlos Cordeiro, one of Infantino’s senior advisers on global strategy and governance, announced his resignation. Cordeiro described the proposal as “a bad deal for football,” warning that it could mortgage the sport’s future by placing excessive commercial interests ahead of the game’s long-term stability. Political criticism has also followed. Greater Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham condemned the proposal, calling it an “outrageous suggestion” and arguing that the plan demonstrated why Infantino was no longer the right person to lead world football’s governing body. Meanwhile, US President Donald Trump said he had not discussed the proposal with Infantino despite their close relationship since Trump’s return to office in 2025. The growing opposition could ultimately prove decisive if the proposal is put before FIFA’s 211 member associations. Infantino has indicated that a simple majority of 106 votes would be required for approval. However, UEFA’s 55 members, Concacaf’s 35 associations and the AFC’s 46 members account for a combined 136 votes. If those member associations follow the positions taken by their respective confederations, the proposal would almost certainly fail to secure enough support. With resistance continuing to spread across the football world, Infantino now faces one of the biggest leadership challenges of his presidency, as critics argue that any major reform must be built on transparency, consultation and the collective interests of the global game.
