October 8 – Ahead of the FIFA Council meeting next Thursday in Zurich, UEFA’s member associations, meeting in Berlin yesterday (Thursday), have outlined a set of reform proposals that hit at the very heart of FIFA president Gianni Infantino’s leadership and FIFA’s basic governance.
Following Infantino’s attempt to railroad through a sell off of FIFA’s commercial rights to a private equity backed new company (FIFA Forward Enterprise – FFE), UEFA alongside Concacaf and the AFC have demanded major change to the future governance and leadership of FIFA.
In Berlin, UEFA’s associations reiterated (with the exception of Azerbaijan) that “they have lost confidence in the current FIFA leadership,” said a UEFA statement.
“Institutional reform will not, on its own, be enough. FIFA also needs new leadership: a respected and unifying figure, deeply rooted in football, with the vision and experience to lead, the ability to command confidence across regions and an unequivocal commitment to development, reform, integrity and independence.”
It is a position that UEFA have held to unwaveringly since the FFE scandal broke at the beginning of September when they first demanded that Infantino step down with immediate effect. Infantino since then has refused to face his accusers in any official forum, though next week will chair a meeting of FIFA’s Council which has on the agenda a limited proposal for a governance review.
That will not be enough to satisfy UEFA’s membership who want a root and branch overhaul (and removal) of FIFA’s governance and leadership, starting with Infantino.
UEFA’s outlined proposals for FIFA reform include a clear separation of powers between FIFA’s Congress, Council and the FIFA Bureau (where the heads of the six confederations meet with the FIFA president), and the removal of the FIFA president from all management duties.
The proposal is for FIFA’s general secretary to appointed by the Bureau and to report to the Bureau rather than solely to the president.
It also calls for the Council to become the key strategy body setting FIFA’s direction, involving all stakeholders and crafting the major proposals that will shape the future of FIFA from international match calendar to disbursement of FIFA Forward funds. Currently the Council is viewed as a bloated committee that is expected to unquestionably rubber-stamp the proposals and ideas of Infantino and his executive – which it invariably does.
Addressing Infantino’s abuse of power as FIFA president, UEFA’s proposals call for stronger ethics, disciplinary, audit and compliance functions free from presidential or executive influence.
There is also the long overdue demand for the International Match Calendar and FIFA Competition changes to have the unanimous approval of the Bureau – removing what has become the president’s authority to do whatever he likes with both, regardless of the effect on the regional and domestic competition eco-systems of confederations and national associations.
UEFA also demands that no FIFA resources may be used for personal or electoral interests. Currently Infantino is blatantly using both FIFA staff and FIFA money, including a private jet, to chase his re-election ambition globally.
Most of what UEFA is demanding has already enshrined in FIFA’s statutes, but has been ignored or overridden by Infantino who came to power with the promise of reforming FIFA in 2016, having been a key member of its 2015 Reform Committee. What is now required, in UEFA’s eyes, is a cast iron reinforcement of these principles and an oversight that has teeth to enforce them.
At the heart of all of this is Infantino’s position and the power he has invested in himself to enable him to act unilaterally on FIFA’s biggest decisions. His removal seems non-negotiable and his refusal to leave could mean the ultimate dismantling of FIFA if UEFA follow through on their threat to withdraw from all FIFA competition.
It is the nuclear option but one that UEFA have previously indicated they would follow through on.
A FIFA without UEFA would ultimately mean no FIFA competitions of meaningful international relevance, and a FIFA with pretty much no money.
More than 800 of the 1,200+ players at the last World Cup make their living at European clubs – they are unlikely to put unpaid country duty before highly paid club contracts. The biggest broadcast deals supporting FIFA are European while the sponsors’ target markets are supported by the wealth of Europe.
More than 50 of FIFA’s nations have populations of less than 1 million, yet they all have one vote, parity with the world’s biggest nations. More than 50 nations with an aggregate population of less than 50 million hold 50 votes, compared to men’s and women’s World Champions Spain, with a population of 49.8 million, who have one vote.
This imbalance should be worrying for the 50. They have already indicated that their decisions will be made on what will be best for them personally (as federations and individuals) rather than what they believe is good for football’s future.
So is the choice of business as normal and the rule of Infantino safer for them and their grant money than the nuclear threat of UEFA pulling out of FIFA competition and taking the best teams, biggest media deals and highest paying sponsors with them. Hypothetically taking it to the next level – and a proposal for a global, non-FIFA, Nations League format has already been floated – how difficult would it be for UEFA to split its four-year cycle to run a second major international competition and invite the best teams from outside Europe to participate.
Would Japan, South Korea, Brazil, USA, Mexico, for example, rather play Spain, England and France or would they choose to play Jamaica, Qatar and New Zealand. It is hypothetical but so was the Super League proposal that was built on a far less secure base.
UEFA’s reform proposals guarantee that grant money will no longer be used as a political tool to keep small nations in voting line. UEFA is also proposing giving each national federation an immediate $10 million from FIFA’s $6 billion reserves.
Their support for Infantino could end up being horribly and misguidedly self-destructive, a real danger to their own existence. If UEFA pulled out of FIFA competitions, who is going to pay their freight as the big money World Cup become meaningless? FIFA could use their reserves for a short while, but it would be short.
The FIFA Council meeting on Thursday has a lot riding on it bit it is only the first stage. UEFA said a further meeting of its 55 national associations will be held before 17 November 2026. That is the deadline for candidacy nominations for the FIFA presidency.
Full text of UEFA’s proposal below.
Contact the writer of this story at [email protected]
PROPOSALS FOR FIFA REFORM
As endorsed in Berlin on 8 October 2026
- Institutional governance:
Separation of powers:
Congress, Council, Bureau, President and GS exercise their own powers. No individual can bypass another’s role. Responsibilities and decision-making must be clear and transparent.
An empowered Bureau:
The FIFA Bureau exercises defined executive powers, ensuring decisions reflect football’s global balance.
A reinforced FIFA Council
Sets FIFA’s direction, involves key stakeholders and shapes major proposals before commitments are made.
Fit-for-purpose Committees
Committees should be streamlined to ensure clear purpose and added value
A President who leads, not manages:
The President chairs the Council, represents FIFA globally and provides leadership without exercising management functions.
An accountable General Secretary:
Appointed and supervised by the Bureau, the GS runs FIFA’s administration under Council oversight.
- Decision-making, oversight and accountability
Stronger ethics, disciplinary, audit & compliance:
Appointments and work of FIFA’s oversight bodies are protected from presidential or executive interference.
No unilateral decision on the International Match Calendar & FIFA competitions:
Changes to the IMC and FIFA competitions – new or existing – require Bureau unanimity.
Member Association right to put items before the FIFA Council:
A defined number of MAs can require a matter to be placed on the FIFA Council agenda.
A clear process for major decisions:
Consultation → Bureau → Council → Decision. Major proposals must follow each required step before a decision is taken.
- Development and FIFA resources
MA-led development support:
Each MA defines its needs with its Confederation. FIFA provides the funding; Confederations support delivery.
FIFA Forward funding as a protected MA entitlement:
Every compliant MA is entitled to its Forward allocation, through a transparent distribution framework and protected from political interference.
FIFA reserves policy & release:
A formal and transparent policy governing the level, investment and use of FIFA’s financial reserves, with at least $10m additional funding for every MA, on top of Forward.
FIFA resources for FIFA purposes:
No FIFA resources may be used for personal or electoral interests.
PakarPBN
A Private Blog Network (PBN) is a collection of websites that are controlled by a single individual or organization and used primarily to build backlinks to a “money site” in order to influence its ranking in search engines such as Google. The core idea behind a PBN is based on the importance of backlinks in Google’s ranking algorithm. Since Google views backlinks as signals of authority and trust, some website owners attempt to artificially create these signals through a controlled network of sites.
In a typical PBN setup, the owner acquires expired or aged domains that already have existing authority, backlinks, and history. These domains are rebuilt with new content and hosted separately, often using different IP addresses, hosting providers, themes, and ownership details to make them appear unrelated. Within the content published on these sites, links are strategically placed that point to the main website the owner wants to rank higher. By doing this, the owner attempts to pass link equity (also known as “link juice”) from the PBN sites to the target website.
The purpose of a PBN is to give the impression that the target website is naturally earning links from multiple independent sources. If done effectively, this can temporarily improve keyword rankings, increase organic visibility, and drive more traffic from search results.
