European teams could still boycott competitions including the World Cup as Uefa says Fifa’s defence of its president Gianni Infantino “changes nothing”.
The English FA has sent a letter withdrawing its support for Infantino in reaction to the plan to sell off stakes in the World Cup to private investors.
European governing body Uefa said in a statement its conditions had not been met, despite Infantino’s plan being aborted.
“First, the proposals to sell off the major competitions had to be withdrawn and secondly,” Uefa’s statement said. “Assurances have to be made that such attempts to disfigure the game in this way will never be made again.
“These conditions have not been met.”
Uefa has already said it has lost confidence in Infantino, calling the Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE) proposal a “shabby, back room, opaque deal”.
But on Thursday, Conmebol, the South American confederation, and the Confederation of African Football (Caf) backed Infantino, as did the football associations of World Cup co-hosts Mexico and tournament runners-up Argentina.
Infantino had offered all associations $40m (£30m) if they backed a proposal for private investment in its tournaments, including the men’s and women’s World Cups, through the FFE subsidiary.
World governing body Fifa said during Wednesday’s meeting “mistakes” regarding FFE were “acknowledged”, saying it was “not the intention” for the Fifa Council and members association to “feel excluded from the process and that the process should have been handled differently”.
Uefa’s statement in response added: “Uefa made it abundantly clear in its statement on Saturday that it has lost confidence in Gianni Infantino’s presidency. That position holds.
“Yesterday’s announcement that some people employed by the Fifa president (and whose careers depend on his favour) agree with him changes nothing.”
Fifa has been approached for comment.
Why Fifa’s statement did not impress Uefa
Infantino arrived at Fifa’s offices in Rabat, Morocco on Wednesday in now-familiar fashion, chauffeured to the building in a motorcade, sitting in the back of a Mercedes with blacked out windows.
Some questioned whether he would still be the Fifa president when he left.
Yet if anything, on the surface at least, Infantino appears emboldened.
This was not the 56-year-old being ordered to a hearing to explain his actions.
It was Infantino who summoned members of the Fifa management board to sit around the table with him, to talk through the events of the last week.
Secretary general Mattias Grafstrom, Infantino’s right-hand man, had been critical in an internal memo to staff, calling the FFE proposals “a sad and reproachable series of events”.
After the meeting finished it appeared to be water under the bridge, with Infantino and Grafstrom pictured sat next to each other and smiling at a Women’s Africa Cup of Nations match between Malawi and Zambia.
If there were clear-the-air talks, they appear to have worked.
Other members of the Fifa management board to attend the meeting included finance chief Thomas Peyer, legal chief Emilio Garcia Silvero, chief of staff Daniel O’Toole, chief of member associations Elkhan Mammadov and media relations director Bryan Swanson.
BBC Sport has been told that Fifa’s chief operating officer, Kevin Lamour, was not invited.
Lamour strongly criticised Infantino’s FFE plan, saying it was “the project of one person”, and “the time has now come for football’s political leaders to ask themselves the right questions and make the right decisions”.
He added: “I lose my job, then so be it. At least I’ll sleep well tonight.”
Lamour has declined to comment to the BBC. Fifa has been approached for comment.
What concerns Uefa is that this meeting was a gathering of employees who are themselves part of the regime.
It is unknown if Infantino was forced to answer difficult questions about his plan. Questions such as: who was involved? Whether there was a competitive tender process? And if he stood to benefit personally?
While Fifa said “mistakes made were acknowledged” and an “apology was made”, there was no direct accountability for the controversy.
Uefa still wants answers to those key questions and will not be content until it gets them – or Infantino leaves.
A boycott remains Uefa’s one key asset
Uefa is in something of a pickle as it tries to get rid of Infantino.
The easiest route to success was the slow turning of the vice throughout this week, hoping to exert enough pressure to force him to quit.
Yet the Swiss appears to have no intention of walking away.
European football looks like an outlier, struggling to gain enough support to topple him.
On Thursday, Lamin Kaba Bajo, the president of the Gambia Football Federation, praised Infantino’s “courage” and for the U-turn, and said he was “willing to give him my support more than ever”.
Only Jordan, one of the few countries which did not back Infantino before last week, has publicly stated it will not vote for his re-election in March.
Concacaf, which oversees football in North and Central America and the Caribbean, also issued a public statement after the proposal was aborted but, unlike Uefa, it did not go as far as to say it had lost confidence in the Fifa president.
Conmebol said on Thursday it would not support “any action or procedure that disregards” Fifa’s mechanisms before the presidential election.
Similarly, the Mexican Football Federation shared a statement to X expressing their support for Infantino, saying it would not recognise or approve any process convened outside of Fifa’s institutional framework.
The Argentine Football Association also published a letter in support of Infantino and the Fifa board, which it said had provided “institutional solidity” with its current “stable and transparent” business model.
Caf said its executive committee “unanimously reconfirmed” its support for Infantino and thanked him for his support for African football over the years.
Ideally, Uefa would force an emergency meeting of the Fifa Council, to provide what it would consider to be a true chance to hold Infantino to account.
But getting the necessary 19 of 36 confederation and football association heads to support it has proven to be exceptionally difficult.
Uefa has also kept on the table the option of a vote of no confidence, which it can trigger via an extraordinary congress any time it wishes.
However, it would need a majority of Fifa’s 211 member associations – 106 votes – to pass the motion. It would be a de facto presidential election without a second candidate.
If Uefa does not think it can get to 106, which looks a stretch, then there is little point in triggering the vote.
The other option is to try to find a unity candidate to stand against Infantino in the election next March. The favourite would be Concacaf president Victor Montagliani.
Any option which takes time gives Infantino space to build bridges, and with Fifa due to announce new funding to member associations by the end of the year he could dangle another carrot for his re-election.
Unless Uefa sticks by the nuclear option – and goes through with its threat of a boycott.
This has issues, and it is not a lever you can pull very often, otherwise it gives the impression of riding roughshod over the rest of the world.
It is one thing to use it to jettison the FFE proposal, another entirely to effectively dethrone the president with it.
Uefa’s stance will soon be tested, with the Fifa Women’s U20s World Cup kicking off in Poland on 5 September. Six European countries are due to take part, including England.
Source : https://www.bbc.com/sport/football/articles/c2k74yevgzwo
