There can be no letup. Humiliated Infantino must stand down at Fifa or be removed | Nick Ames
The article argues that Gianni Infantino should resign as Fifa president or be removed, following the collapse of his proposal to sell parts of the World Cup to private investors. Its author says Uefa’s reported call for a boycott and declaration of no confidence should begin a broader effort to force him out, claiming that the episode has further damaged Fifa’s already weak reputation for integrity and governance.
Infantino withdrew the Fifa Forward Enterprise scheme after opposition, saying dialogue would resume in the shared interests of football. The commentary cites wider controversies during his presidency, including the handling of Folarin Balogun’s suspended ban, a Fifa peace prize awarded to Donald Trump, new hydration breaks, Saudi Arabia’s fast-tracked 2034 World Cup bid and reported plans for a 64-team tournament. It argues these incidents conflict with Fifa rules requiring its president to protect the organisation’s values and foster positive relations.
- The article urges Infantino to resign or be removed.
- His World Cup investment plan was abandoned after backlash.
- The writer cites several recent Fifa governance controversies.
New here? Start with this
Fifa is world football’s governing body, responsible for organising major competitions including the men’s World Cup. Its president leads the organisation, while national associations and regional bodies such as Uefa represent members and oversee football in their parts of the world.
Gianni Infantino has been Fifa president since 2016. His proposals and decisions have drawn scrutiny from football officials and commentators, who have raised questions about how Fifa is run and how it protects its reputation and values.
Disagreements over Fifa’s leadership matter because the organisation’s decisions affect national teams, players, supporters and the finances of the game worldwide. Uefa is one of Fifa’s regional bodies, so tensions between it and Fifa can shape how football’s governing institutions work together.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Advocates of removing Gianni Infantino would argue that Fifa’s president must retain the confidence of its member bodies and demonstrate unimpeachable judgement, particularly given football’s history of governance failures. If Uefa’s reported no-confidence stance reflects a serious and sustained loss of trust, they would say decisive constitutional or legal action is necessary to protect the organisation’s legitimacy, accountability and the interests of the game.
The case against
Those opposed to an immediate removal would argue that a call for resignation should not substitute for clearly evidenced allegations, due process and the procedures set out in Fifa’s statutes. They may contend that institutional stability, the votes of Fifa’s wider global membership and a fair opportunity for Infantino to answer criticism matter, and that leadership disputes should be resolved through transparent democratic mechanisms rather than pressure campaigns.