UEFA, the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) and Concacaf have jointly escalated their confrontation with FIFA President Gianni Infantino, demanding a fully independent review of the events surrounding FIFA’s abandoned FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) proposal.
The three confederations made the demand in a strongly worded joint open letter signed by UEFA President Aleksander Čeferin, AFC President Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim Al Khalifa and Concacaf President Victor Montagliani. They accused FIFA’s leadership of a serious failure of judgment and said trust had been damaged by the way the proposal was developed and presented.
The letter argues that the controversy is not principally about money or the distribution of FIFA development funding, but about the integrity of football’s governance and the responsibilities of elected leaders.
“When trust is broken through deception, when an individual places himself above the collective that entrusted him with authority, that duty has been abandoned,” the confederations said.
The intervention comes less than two weeks after FIFA abandoned the FFE proposal following intense opposition from football associations and the regional confederations.
FIFA had proposed creating a new FIFA-owned and controlled subsidiary to consolidate its commercial rights and tournament operations. The plan envisaged raising up to $4.2 billion from minority, non-controlling investors on an implied valuation of approximately $20 billion. FIFA said it would retain control of the company and all sporting and regulatory decisions.
FIFA also presented FFE as a mechanism for dramatically increasing development funding. Under the proposal, FIFA said each of its 211 member associations could receive $20 million in Forward funding for the 2027–30 cycle, alongside an optional additional $20 million through a proposed Fast Forward Programme.
But UEFA, AFC and Concacaf objected to the process as much as the substance.
In their latest letter, the three confederations rejected FIFA’s characterization of the controversy as primarily a communication failure. They argued that the proposal was advanced on a compressed timetable without meaningful consultation and that member associations were pushed toward a deadline before they had adequate opportunity to examine the terms.
They further criticised FIFA’s decision to prepare its own report on the episode, insisting that the review should instead be conducted by a completely independent third party.
“The FIFA administration should play no role in conducting the review,” the confederations said.
The demand follows FIFA’s own acknowledgement that mistakes had occurred during the process. Reuters reported that FIFA subsequently abandoned the proposal after resistance from regional confederations and member associations intensified.
The three confederations also raised concerns over a recent FIFA leadership meeting in Morocco. According to their letter, only one elected official attended, while FIFA Council members and member associations were not invited and only selected senior FIFA staff participated.
They argued that the circumstances surrounding that meeting reinforced concerns about the concentration of decision-making and transparency within FIFA.
The latest confrontation represents a significant escalation in the governance dispute surrounding Infantino.
Reuters reported that the abandoned $4.2 billion plan has already produced a wider leadership crisis, with several national associations withdrawing or reconsidering support for Infantino ahead of the next FIFA presidential election. Infantino nevertheless retains substantial backing, particularly from parts of Africa and South America.
The joint letter stops short of explicitly demanding Infantino’s immediate resignation. Its central demand is institutional: an independent examination of the FFE episode and greater accountability over how FIFA’s leadership exercises its authority.
The confederations concluded by invoking football’s traditional principle of collective governance.
“Football’s strength has always been its unity,” they said, calling for leadership that “serves football, not seeks to command it.”
The dispute now moves beyond the fate of a commercial proposal that FIFA has already withdrawn. At stake is whether the governing structures of world football can restore confidence between FIFA’s administration, its six confederations and the 211 national associations that make up its membership.
Leave feedback about this