Blogger’s Note: Jared Kushner – Trump’s son-in-law – is an overt Zionist. Selling FIFA to the Trump family is tantamount to selling international football to Israel. Galloping privatisation would then gut football, deprive it of its working-class and internationalist grass-roots identity, and forever smear it with the odour of militarism, fascism, and genocide. The US (and Trump) now nothing about “football” – indeed, by using this English word, the North Americans think I am discussing a form of Rugby they developed – where cowardly players wear body-armour to compete. What we are seeing here is the Socialist principle of “Solidarity” at work at the regional level of football. This means that all the “national” governing bodies – which represent Players’ Unions – have presented a “United Front” to stop this particular develop of capitalism and right-wing politics. All the ingredients are there for radical left-wing politics – but of course – this collective bargaining power has been used in a very specific manner. In Europe, for instance, an elite top-tier player (before tax) can earn something in the region of £525,000 a week or an annual (yearly) salary of £27,300,000 (even after tax – this is a substantial amount). Obviously, this is not your average worker and the amounts are obscene when you consider a Nurse will yearn around £25,000 a year (after tax). Still, that is the world of predatory capitalism. Amateur (grass-roots) football in England sees eleven men turn-up every weekend and play for 90 minutes – for free. Add to this how expensive ticket prices are to attend Premier League games live (£75 per match on average) or about the same to watch each match on live-TV – and it is clear that the business of football empowers a very small section of the working-class – at the expense of the material well-being of the lumpen-proletariat. I have heard stories told of men out of work spending their dole money not on feeding their families – but instead attending a 90-minute game. The fans fuel the game – but so does business investment – and here in lies the crux of the matter with FIFA. Exploiting the workers to enrich a few workers is just part of the beautiful game. Business does its part as popular players boost brand sales – and brand sales raise the value of popular players. These players are not building time machines, perfecting space travel, or finding a cure for cancer – but are kicking around a ball full of air – as a leisure activity. It has been said that like religion – football is like an opium of the masses – but it does not have to be that way. Ironically, whilst paying for their National Squads, players do not receive their huge domestic salaries (there may be a nominal fee per match – around £2000 – which in the case of England is donated to charity) – although they will obviously benefit from the publicity regarding their ongoing sponsorship deals. It is the profitable association with success and glamour which fuels this lucrative machine. Still, it would appear that Players’ Unions (which have no moral qualms exploiting their fellow working-class) draw the line at openly associating themselves with the murderous regime of Israel and its genocidal policies in Gaza (and elsewhere). good for them. UEFA (and other governing bodies) threatened to down-tools and go on strike – and it worked! We must oppose Zionism because Zionism is racist – just look at how poorly Iran (and other Islamic countries) were treated at the 2026 World Cup! ACW (1.8.2026)
Fifa scraps controversial World Cup investment plan
Jack Skelton, BBC Sport senior journalist and Simon Stone, Chief football news reporter
- Published1 August 2026, 00:30 BST
Fifa president Gianni Infantino says he has scrapped the controversial plan to sell off stakes in the governing body’s major competitions, following widespread opposition.
Infantino said it had become clear the project had “created divisions” that are “no longer in the interest” of its original objective.
The Swiss official added: “As a result, this proposal will not proceed.”
Infantino had offered all 211 member associations $40m (£30m) if they backed a proposal for private investment in its tournaments, including the men’s and women’s World Cups.
- Infantino on the brink? Who might replace him if he goes?
- Published4 hours ago
- Courting controversy and befriending Trump – the story of Fifa boss Infantino
- Published21 hours ago
Shaikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa, Asian Football Confederation (AFC) president, welcomed the withdrawal of the plan.
“The future of global football must always be shaped through proper consultation, collective dialogue and respect for the established governance structures of our game,” said Shaikh Salman.
European football’s 55 member associations, Uefa, voted on Thursday to boycott World Cups if the plans went ahead.
Fifa’s chief operating officer Kevin Lamour said the governing body’s own administration had been “deceived” about the project.
Carlos Cordeiro – Infantino’s senior adviser on global strategy and governance – resigned over the matter, saying the proposal was “a bad deal for football” and would “mortgage football’s future”.
That came after two other major confederations spoke out against the plans.
Concacaf, which governs football in North, Central America and the Caribbean – and hosted this summer’s World Cup – said its members “rejected” the proposal, with sources saying the vast majority of associations from the region are losing, or have lost, faith in Infantino.
The AFC said it stood in “solidarity” with Uefa and Concacaf, while UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham said Infantino was “the wrong man” to lead Fifa.
Infantino, 56, is now under immense pressure as he seeks re-election for a fourth term as president at the Fifa Congress in March.
He said he now intends to “bring all interested parties back together” in the “spirit of shared interest” in football.
Infantino’s plans were unlikely to pass
Despite rejections from Uefa and Concacaf, Fifa initially vowed to continue with its proposals on Friday, saying “nobody is selling football”.
However, in announcing the plans had been scrapped, Infantino acknowledged he needed the backing of the majority of Fifa member associations – meaning 106 of its 211 members needed to vote in favour.
That became unlikely when the AFC joined Uefa and Concacaf in opposing the plans.
Uefa has 55 votes, Concacaf has 35 and Asia has 46.
If all member associations backed the stance of their governing body, that would have meant 136 nations voting against Infantino’s plan.
The governing bodies in Africa (CAF) and Oceania (OFC) had said they would discuss Fifa’s plan in August.
The governing body overseeing football in South America, Conmebol, said it had asked Fifa for “additional information and clarifications” regarding the “scope, structure, governance and possible effects” of the proposals.
What was Infantino’s plan?
Fifa and Infantino wanted to create a commercial subsidiary to run its main events, including its World Cups, with external investors able to buy stakes in it.
It said it would “invite third parties to make minority, non-controlling investments” in a new subsidiary – Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE).
Infantino set a deadline of 19 September for football federations to accept his plans if they wanted to access an initial $20m (£15m).
A 25-page document created by investment bank JP Morgan laid out how Fifa’s tournaments would expand to hit an estimated increased payout of 24m euros (£20.5m) per member association in the 2035-2039 cycle.
It mentioned “new business initiatives” and “attracting top talent with incentive-driven compensation”.
The World Cup is described in it as the “most widely viewed” sporting event but Fifa, by contrast, is said to be “under-monetised”.
There was no mention in the document of the women’s game.
Fifa said Thrive Eternal was expected to lead the proposed investor group for FFE.
Thrive is an American venture capital firm founded by Joshua Kushner – the brother of US President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared.
Trump – addressing the proposals for the first time on Friday – said he had not spoken to Infantino about the plans.
The two have developed a close relationship since Trump assumed office for a second time in 2025.
Can Infantino survive?
Infantino became Fifa president in 2016 when he beat AFC president Sheikh Salman al-Khalifa by 115 votes to 88.
Fifa’s next president will be confirmed at the organisation’s 77th Congress in Morocco next March. Candidates have until 18 November to put their names forward.
Prior to this week, it had been anticipated Infantino would be re-elected unopposed. Associations around the world, including some in Europe, had already confirmed their intention to vote for him.
It remains to be seen if the events of this week will result in a mass withdrawal of their support.
In his statement, Infantino reiterated his plan was designed to strengthen members associations, “especially in countries where support is most needed”.
He added: “Our purpose has always been – and always will be – to unite and improve.”
However, the proposal clearly created division within Fifa itself.
Cordeiro, who represented the world governing body on the White House taskforce for the 2026 World Cup, is the first senior figure at Fifa to resign over the plans.
In a lengthy statement, Cordeiro said he “unequivocally” opposed the plans and said he “did not accept the proposition” Fifa needed outside investors to “unlock greater value”. He added he had no involvement in the proposal.
It is understood Infantino even left some of Fifa’s eight vice-presidents in the dark about his plan, which it is claimed could have raised $10bn (£7.5bn).
Lamour called it “the project of one person” and said “a president must bring people together, unite them, and inspire them” but this was “the opposite”.
“If that means I lose my job, then so be it,” he added. “I will understand and respect that decision. At least I’ll sleep well tonight.”
Timeline
Monday, 27 July
- In a 15-slide post on his personal Instagram account, Fifa president Gianni Infantino tells his critics to “meditate, pray or watch a football match” instead of “spreading hate and false rumours” about his leadership.
Tuesday, 28 July
- The Times and Financial Times report Infantino’s plan to sell stakes in its competitions, including the World Cup, to private investors.
- Uefa publishes its first statement saying football is “not Fifa’s to sell”, and accuses Fifa of ‘crossing a line’.
- Fifa issues statement confirming the plans.
Wednesday, 29 July
- Infantino writes to all 211 Fifa member associations saying they will receive $40m (£30m) if they back his plans, but that they must do so by 19 September if they want to access an initial $20m (£15m).
- Uefa says “Fifa cannot continue to use our sport to enrich themselves and their friends.”
Thursday, 30 July
- Uefa’s 55 member associations vote to boycott World Cups if Infantino’s plan goes ahead.
- Concacaf says its 41 member associations also “rejected” the proposal.
Friday, 31 July
- Fifa says “nobody is selling football” and vows to continue with the plan.
- Asian Football Confederation (AFC) says it “stands in solidarity” with Uefa and Concacaf, though stops short of unequivocally rejecting Infantino’s proposal.
- A senior adviser to Infantino, Carlos Cordeiro, resigns citing “a bad deal for football” that would “mortgage football’s future”.
- UK Prime Minister Andy Burnham says Infantino is the “wrong man” to lead Fifa.
- Fifa’s chief operating officer Kevin Lamour says the governing body’s own administration has been “deceived” about the project.
Saturday, 1 August
- Infantino releases statement at about 00:30 BST on Saturday, saying the plan will not proceed.
SANGHA KOMMUNE (SSR) 