The map showing world’s division over Infantino
Fifa president Gianni Infantino, who once looked certain to be re-elected unopposed to a fourth term next March, now faces genuine division among the organisation's member associations after the fallout from his now-abandoned plan to sell stakes in the World Cup and other competitions to private investors. BBC Sport has mapped the apparent positions of all 210 voting members, revealing a split that could force a genuine contest if a unity candidate emerges to challenge him, rather than the coronation many expected just weeks ago.
The current tally stands at roughly 73 associations in support of Infantino, 124 opposed and 13 undecided, though this picture is described as fluid and likely to shift before the vote. A significant coalition against him formed on Monday when Uefa, Concacaf and the Asian Football Confederation, together representing 136 associations, signed a joint letter accusing Infantino and Fifa of breaking trust "through deception," with England and Wales among those withdrawing prior letters of support. However, he retains strong backing in Africa and South America, where confederations have benefited from major investment under his leadership, while Asia and Oceania remain potential swing regions with several countries, including Mexico, Bhutan, the Philippines and the UAE, breaking ranks to back him.
- Fifa members split roughly 73-124-13 for, against and undecided on Infantino
- Backlash follows his abandoned plan to sell World Cup investment stakes
- Uefa, Concacaf and AFC accuse Infantino of "deception" in joint letter
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters of Infantino argue that private investment in football's competitions represents necessary modernisation to enhance infrastructure and development globally. His demonstrated commitment to channelling investment towards African and South American football has tangibly benefited those regions, and his re-election had broad support precisely because member associations have prospered under his financial stewardship. Private capital injection, properly structured, could generate substantial additional revenue whilst maintaining the sport's integrity and accelerating grassroots development.
The case against
Critics contend that the World Cup and major competitions constitute shared global sporting assets that ought not be privatised for commercial gain. The manner in which these proposals were pursued—characterised by major confederations as deceptive and a breach of trust—represents a fundamental failure of transparent democratic governance within FIFA. Member associations deserve open consultation on decisions affecting football's foundational competitions, and privatisation raises legitimate concerns about whether shareholder interests could eventually supersede the sport's global development mission.