RESOLVING THE LEDGER
This is one outlet's own report from Yahoo Sports — the article as it was filed. Other outlets are covering the same event; open the full story to compare every source side by side.
See the full story · 2 sourcesFifa president Gianni Infantino has withdrawn his controversial World Cup funding plan [Getty Images]
Any hope Gianni Infantino might have had of tiptoeing away from the scene of his World Cup private-investment wreckage having sustained only minor damage to his reputation disappeared on Saturday.
Uefa - the governing body of European football - went straight for the head of world game, saying it had "lost confidence" in his leadership.
It was one of the most ferocious statements ever aimed at the holder of that position.
Words such as "shabby" and "secret schemes" spoke for themselves.
It came after a dramatic five days for football that sparked memories of the European Super League debacle of 2021.
The ESL was a splinter league formed by 12 of Europe's biggest clubs, including six from the Premier League.
Former England defender Gary Neville echoed the thoughts of many when he referred to it as "pure greed". It quickly unravelled.
Infantino's private-investment plan did not have a catchy title, and lasted two days longer than the ESL.
But despite football's world governing body confirming the proposal was being withdrawn on Saturday, the infamy will linger much longer.
At the top level, football is a vast, money-making enterprise. The sums players and executives earn is beyond the scope of 'ordinary' fans.
But have we discovered there is a line that cannot be crossed?
Uefa has 'lost confidence' in Infantino's Fifa leadership
Fifa scraps controversial World Cup investment plan
Infantino on the brink? Who might replace him if he goes?
A question that needed to be asked
AFC president Sheikh Salman bin Ibrahim al-Khalifa (left) - with Gianni Infantino in 2023 - was among those to criticise the Swiss' plans [Getty Images]
The question many have asked around Infantino's plan is tied into a separate - but critical - aspect of the fundamental reasons behind this week unravelling.
Fifa is a not-for-profit organisation. It has huge financial reserves - over $2bn (£1.48bn) - and is expected to announce record revenues of about $15bn (£11.13bn) in relation to this summer's World Cup.
Given that backdrop - and the reality some countries simply did not need the extra $40m (£29.67m) being offered for football development initiatives if they signed up to Infantino's plan by 19 September - many wondered why private investment was needed in the first place.
It was a question that needed to be asked. But that did not happen in public - or, it has become apparent, privately in Fifa's corridors of power.
Many of Fifa's most senior people - from vice-presidents to special advisers and executives - did not have a chance to ask any questions, simply because they had no clue the plans were being drawn up.
Uefa had strongly opposed the plans from the moment they became public. When they were dropped, its response was damning.
"The current Fifa leadership has not only lost Uefa's confidence but also that of many other members of the football family," it said in a statement.
"When Gianni Infantino asked for the trust and the votes of Fifa's member associations to elect him as their president in 2016, he said: 'Of course we have to be transparent.'
"He told the assembled stakeholders: 'The money of Fifa is your money. It's not the money of the Fifa president. You are the national associations and the money of Fifa has to serve for the development of football and not for anything else.'
"On both these promises, he has failed to deliver."
It was not the first time a lack of transparency had been highlighted.
Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa - president of the Asian Football Confederation (AFC), and one of eight Fifa vice-presidents - referred to it too.
He said any future plans that may impact global football should be presented to members "in a timely, transparent and meaningful manner".
"The future of global football must always be shaped through proper consultation, collective dialogue and respect for the established governance structures of our game," he added.
Football Australia chair Anter Isaac said trust was earned "not simply through good decisions, but through the integrity of the processes that lead to them".
"Football has never stood still, nor should it," he said.
"Some principles, however, should never change. Integrity. Independence. Good governance. Transparency. Meaningful consultation. Due process. These are not constraints on progress."
European Super League all over again?
With the ESL, it was the fans that drew the line - backed by the Premier League, the Football Association and even Prince William.
The plan in 2021 was for the clubs who took part to remain in their national leagues, but also to play each other in a new midweek European competition, which would have rivalled the Champions League.
Critics argued it was a way for the clubs to enrich themselves in a closed league that would have increased commercial and broadcasting income, and the principle of a domestic football pyramid should be protected.
After 72 hours of criticism, the plans all but fell apart. In the aftermath, it was claimed clubs did not get the opportunity to present a rounded case because the outline plan was leaked to the media. That meant the reaction was so fierce any counter-argument would have been lost.
This week has been remarkably similar - except this time, it was people in football who drew the line in the sand.
The only real difference is Fifa did put its counterargument forward in the early hours of Friday - along with an assertion its "planned consultation process was disrupted by incorrect media reports".
As with the ESL, by that point the direction of travel was already established and could not be changed.
With sentiment so strongly against the p...
AIPROPX is an independent multi-source news index — we track, compare, and connect coverage from across the web into one place you won't find anywhere else.