Gianni Infantino: Uefa says Fifa’s backing of its president ‘changes nothing’

Uefa is in something of a pickle as it tries to get rid of Infantino.

The easiest route to success was the slow turning of the vice throughout this week, hoping to exert enough pressure to force him to quit.

Yet the Swiss appears to have no intention of walking away.

European football looks like an outlier, struggling to gain enough support to topple him.

On Thursday, Lamin Kaba Bajo, the president of the Gambia Football Federation, praised Infantino’s “courage” and for the U-turn, and said he was “willing to give him my support more than ever”.

Only Jordan, one of the few countries which did not back Infantino before last week, has publicly stated it will not vote for his re-election in March.

Concacaf, which oversees football in North and Central America and the Caribbean, also issued a public statement after the proposal was aborted but, unlike Uefa, it did not go as far as to say it had lost confidence in the Fifa president.

Conmebol, the South American confederation, said on Thursday it would not support “any action or procedure that disregards” Fifa’s mechanisms before the presidential election.

Similarly, the Mexican Football Federation shared a statement to X expressing their support for Infantino, saying it would not recognise or approve any process convened outside of Fifa’s institutional framework.

The Argentine Football Association also published a letter in support of Infantino and the Fifa board, which it said had provided “institutional solidity” with its current “stable and transparent” business model.

The Confederation of African Football (Caf) said its executive committee “unanimously reconfirmed” its support for Infantino and thanked him for his support for African football over the years.

Ideally, Uefa would force an emergency meeting of the Fifa Council, to provide what it would consider to be a true chance to hold Infantino to account.

But getting the necessary 19 of 36 confederation and football association heads to support it has proven to be exceptionally difficult.

Uefa has also kept on the table the option of a vote of no confidence, which it can trigger via an extraordinary congress any time it wishes.

However, it would need a majority of Fifa’s 211 member associations – 106 votes – to pass the motion. It would be a de facto presidential election without a second candidate.

If Uefa does not think it can get to 106, which looks a stretch, then there is little point in triggering the vote.

The other option is to try to find a unity candidate to stand against Infantino in the election next March. The favourite would be Concacaf president Victor Montagliani.

Any option which takes time gives Infantino space to build bridges, and with Fifa due to announce new funding to member associations by the end of the year he could dangle another carrot for his re-election.

Unless Uefa sticks by the nuclear option – and goes through with its threat of a boycott.

This has issues, and it is not a lever you can pull very often, otherwise it gives the impression of riding roughshod over the rest of the world.

It is one thing to use it to jettison the FFE proposal, another entirely to effectively dethrone the president with it.

Uefa’s stance will soon be tested, with the Fifa Women’s U20s World Cup kicking off in Poland on 5 September. Six European countries are due to take part, including England.