Infantino wants FIFA to reinvent itself: Letter to 211 associations and the big question about power

FIFA is facing a rare paradox: the man with the highest power is the one proposing an investigation into how that power is used. Gianni Infantino has just sent a striking letter to the FIFA Council and the leaders of all 211 member associations, in which he declares he is ready to accept reform and wants to review the organisation's major decision-making process. This is not a routine statement. It is a move that could reshape the entire global football governance structure. According to The Athletic, Infantino's letter was sent to the FIFA Council and member associations amid growing pressure on the Swiss president. The key point is the meeting scheduled for October 15, where Infantino wants the FIFA Council to request an independent assessment of the current governance structure. He also wants to open dialogues with member associations and other stakeholders to find concrete improvements. The story is not just about changing a few statutes. Infantino wants the discussion to cover the role of the FIFA president, the role of the FIFA Council, the role of the FIFA Congress and how major decisions are adopted. He also raises the issue of greater transparency and more input from member associations in decisions of vital importance. Observers are not surprised to see this move appear right after one of Infantino's most serious political failures since taking power. That is the plan called FIFA Forward Enterprise. Under this plan, FIFA wanted to sell 20 percent of its commercial and organisational activities to outside investors for around 4.2 billion US dollars. The idea sounded modern. FIFA would have a massive financial resource to develop global football, invest in tournaments, support small associations and optimise the commercial value of FIFA-run competitions. But when the information leaked, the backlash was fierce. Member associations feared losing control. The media questioned transparency. Critics said FIFA was turning itself into a private corporation where football power lay in the hands of anonymous investors. FIFA eventually withdrew the plan before it could be officially presented to the FIFA Council and member associations. Infantino stressed that it was only a proposal and that no final decision had ever been taken. But the controversy left a large crack in the trust of member associations towards FIFA's leadership. Infantino himself acknowledged that in his letter. He wrote that major plans can only succeed if the decision-making process commands sufficient trust. His sentence could be understood as an admission that FIFA Forward Enterprise failed not only because of its content, but also because of the way it was formed and communicated. The question of transparency is not new to FIFA. The organisation was mired in a corruption scandal in 2026, when senior officials were arrested and Sepp Blatter was forced to leave the presidency. Infantino replaced him with a promise of radical reform. But more than a decade later, many people still feel that FIFA operates the old way: power concentrated around a small group, major decisions made behind closed doors, and smaller associations often only invited to ratify. Infantino's new letter could therefore be a clever diplomatic move. It allows him to appear as a reformer, someone who listens and is ready to admit mistakes. But it could also be a sign that Infantino is genuinely facing a leadership crisis unlike any he has experienced since taking office. The truth lies in the details. When Infantino talks about an independent assessment, he does not say who will conduct it. When he talks about more transparency, he does not say which figures or specific decisions will be published. When he talks about listening to member associations, he does not specify how the new decision-making mechanism will empower anyone. These things matter because FIFA's history shows that every reform promise needs to be measured by action. In 2026, Infantino promised to increase representation for smaller associations. In 2026, he promised to improve financial governance. In 2026, the World Cup in Qatar raised a host of questions about human rights, costs and the bidding process. In each phase, FIFA adjusted its message to reduce media pressure, but the internal power structure remained almost unchanged. This letter can be seen as an attempt to avoid repeating that scenario. Infantino needs to prove that he is not just talking. The meeting on October 15 will be the first test. If the FIFA Council agrees to an independent assessment, that is a signal. If that assessment is truly conducted by a credible third party and the results are published openly, that is a step forward. But if everything remains internal meetings and unpublished reports, then Infantino's letter is merely a media operation. The FIFA Forward Enterprise story shows Infantino's fundamental problem. He wants FIFA to be richer, stronger and more globally influential. But to do that, he needs the consensus of 211 member associations, each with different interests, cultures and views of FIFA. Large associations such as Germany, England, Spain, France and Italy have strong voices because of their commercial value and football history. Small associations from Africa, Asia, Oceania and the Caribbean look at FIFA as an important channel of financial redistribution. They do not want to risk losing funding, but they also do not want to be left out of major decisions. That is why Infantino's proposal to increase the voice of member associations may receive a warm reception. But interpretations differ greatly. A small association might understand it as being more involved in strategic planning. A large association might understand it as gaining more veto power over revolutionary changes. In the letter, Infantino also mentions the role of the FIFA president and his desire to review that role. This is an interesting detail because it directly relates to his current term. Infantino took power in February 2026 after an extraordinary congress, replacing the banned Blatter. He was re-elected in 2026 and later continued to hold power without a serious challenge. The FIFA term-limit rule was introduced as part of the post-2026 reform. But when Infantino took power, he mentioned that his term only started in June 2026, and this helped him extend his time in office. Those seemingly boring legal details are the key to power. Now, facing pressure from the FIFA Forward Enterprise plan, Infantino is again questioning the role of the president. Analysts believe he is trying to reshape the understanding of that position in his favour. If the independent assessment concludes that the FIFA president should focus more on strategy and less on operations, Infantino can justify some of his controversial decisions in the past. If, by contrast, the assessment concludes that the president needs to be more accountable to the FIFA Council, then that could be a challenge for Infantino. He would have to accept a governance framework that limits his personal power. This explains why the language in his letter is very measured: he wants to control both the proposal and the conclusion of the reform process. One detail that cannot be ignored is Infantino's announcement that he will run again in March. Currently, he is the only candidate. Other candidates have until November 18 to submit their bids. The absence of a new candidate could turn the election into an internal referendum on Infantino's position. But it also means that if he wins another term, he will face the most difficult mandate of his career. Pressure does not only come from member associations. European governments are also paying close attention to how FIFA manages global football. The Qatar case and the issue of the congested match calendar are making politicians suspicious about FIFA putting commercial interests above the interests of players and domestic leagues. In his letter, Infantino stresses listening to all stakeholders. But who are the stakeholders? Are member associations all of them? Are players, coaches, referees, continental confederations, clubs and fans being listened to? This is a question he has not answered clearly. FIFA often speaks about growing global football, but decisions of vital importance are usually made by a small group. The 2026 World Cup in Qatar is a prime example. The decision to award Qatar the hosting right was made in 2026, before Infantino's time, but he had to bear the political consequences when the tournament took place. Controversies over labour conditions, LGBTQ rights and huge costs made FIFA lose serious points in public opinion. The 2026 World Cup will take place in the United States, Canada and Mexico. This is a completely different political context. The world's largest economy will be the centre of attention, and the pressure for transparency will be much greater than it was in Qatar. If FIFA still operates in the old way, the 2026 World Cup could become a global media crisis. That explains why Infantino urgently needs to make a reform proposal right now, before the March election. He cannot afford to let FIFA's politics be dominated by old controversies. He needs a new story, a shared mission broad enough for all associations to feel part of a change. But for Vietnamese football, this story also has its own implications. The VFF is currently one of the 211 member associations and has the right to participate in discussions on FIFA reform. If the voices of smaller associations are more respected, Vietnamese football could benefit in the long term. If reform is only a tool to consolidate personal power, smaller associations will continue to play the role of observers in a playground dominated by big players. History shows that FIFA is very good at creating new committees, new panels and new evaluation boards. In 2026, after the 2026 and 2026 World Cup scandals, FIFA created an Ethics Committee and talked about transparency. In 2026, after the Zurich arrests, FIFA created more reform committees. But these changes often only touched the surface. The core question is where real power lies. At FIFA, strategic decisions are often made from the president's office, with the participation of vice presidents and the secretary general. The FIFA Council, despite representing many continents, usually ratifies rather than challenges decisions. If Infantino truly wants to give more power to the FIFA Council, he must accept a real system of checks and balances. That means the FIFA Council can reject the president's proposals. It also means meetings are not just ceremonies, but substantive debates. But do FIFA Council members want that? Some may enjoy a more powerful role. Others owe their seats to Infantino's support in previous elections. So his letter is not only a reform signal, but also a way to test loyalty. When Infantino talks about seeking consensus from member associations, he can be sure that most associations will support him. Many associations receive significant funding from FIFA, especially through the FIFA Forward programme. They do not want to lose that resource. So a referendum-style vote on reform could easily go Infantino's way. This is the biggest paradox of this letter. Infantino can talk about transparency and listening, but the current power structure still allows him to control the outcome. An independent assessment could be given to a consultancy firm paid by FIFA. The participants in the dialogue could be selected. Important decisions could still be made behind closed doors. In football, people often talk about romantic stories of small teams beating giants. But at FIFA level, that romantic story barely exists. Small associations usually have two options: sit at the table and accept the rules, or stay outside and lose their voice. Infantino's letter does not completely change that reality, but it opens a window for dialogue. If I were invited to such a meeting, I would ask Infantino three things. First, who will select the independent assessment team? Second, will the full report be published? Third, if the findings point to mistakes by FIFA's own leadership, will the FIFA Council have the power to request changes in personnel? These questions sound simple, but the answers reveal the whole nature of the reform. For now, Infantino holds the upper hand. He is the only candidate for the March election. The match schedule has already been set. His letter was sent to the associations as an opening to a process he wants to control from start to finish. But football is always a sport of surprises. If a major association puts forward another candidate, or if international public opinion continues to pressure, the situation could change. European associations are especially important. UEFA and its members have had conflicts with Infantino over the plan to hold the World Cup every two years. That idea met strong opposition from UEFA and European leagues. Although it did not succeed, it still left a crack in Infantino's relationship with European football. Now, when Infantino talks about governance reform, European associations may see it as an opportunity to tighten FIFA's power. They can demand a truly independent assessment, not funded by FIFA. They can demand the participation of player unions, domestic leagues and other stakeholders. If Infantino is unwilling to give in, the reform could turn into a long political battle. One of FIFA's biggest blind spots is the match calendar. Players constantly complain about overload. Clubs worry about the growing number of matches. New international tournaments such as the expanded FIFA Club World Cup are making the season even tighter. If FIFA truly listens to stakeholders, they must put the match calendar at the centre of the dialogue. But changing the calendar means changing cash flow. New tournaments bring new revenue. FIFA has signed major broadcasting deals with many partners around the world. If the number of matches is reduced, FIFA may have to renegotiate those contracts. This explains why decisions related to the calendar are rarely discussed openly. So when Infantino talks about greater transparency, look at concrete decisions related to the calendar, financial distribution and hosting rights. These are where FIFA's real power is exercised. His letter is a signal, not a detailed plan. There is another way to look at this letter. Perhaps Infantino is doing exactly what a smart leader should do: stepping back to protect his position. By proposing an independent investigation, he is taking control of a story that the press and political rivals could otherwise use against him. He turns weakness into a reform narrative. In football, this is not new. Many club presidents and executives, when facing a crisis, offer reform proposals to calm public opinion. They hire audit firms, create ethics committees and promise transparency, but the real structure remains unchanged. Only when power is actually threatened do they accept painful changes. Is Infantino in such a position? Not yet. He still controls most of FIFA's political trajectory. The October 15 meeting will be held with an agenda he suggested. FIFA Council members will have an opportunity to express their views, but summoning, preparation and communication remain in the hands of the president's office. The important thing is that member associations must use this opportunity. If they just sit quietly and answer Infantino's questions, they will miss a historic chance. They need to demand a well-scoped assessment, a truly independent investigation, and a public commitment that results will be published uncensored. Small associations may not have the financial power of European associations, but they hold the majority of votes in the FIFA Congress. If they unite, they can create enough pressure to force FIFA to change its ways. Infantino's letter could be an invitation, but also a trap: if they join without conviction, they only add legitimacy to a process they do not control. In Vietnam, fans are used to following FIFA's changes as a distant story. But in reality, FIFA decisions directly affect funding, chances to host international tournaments and the position of Vietnamese football on the regional map. When FIFA changes its budget allocation, local football academies, community development projects and youth training centres can benefit or be left behind. Therefore, this is not the time for fans to stay away. Watch what happens during the October 15 meeting, pay attention to member association statements, and ask whether this reform will truly change the way FIFA is governed. Football is a game of numbers, but power is something that cannot be measured by a league table. One thing I remember most is the sentence in Infantino's letter: big ideas must be developed, tested and communicated through clear and reliable institutions. That is a nice sentence. But clear and reliable institutions do not appear on their own. They require conflict, debate and sometimes tense votes. Infantino knows this. He has experienced internal battles when replacing Blatter. He has witnessed divisions between continental confederations. He understands that FIFA is not an ordinary club, but an empire with overlapping interests. That is why his letter cannot be a detailed plan. It can only be a beginning. Now the focus shifts to the member associations. How will they respond? Will they remain silent, support, or make specific demands? The answer will appear in the coming weeks. If a group of large associations sends an open letter demanding that Infantino clarify the scope of the independent assessment, that is a sign that world football does not want to be led by a pre-written reform script. In the history of World Cups, the most famous stories often come from unpredictable moments. Germany's group-stage elimination at the 2026 World Cup was a shock. Argentina losing to Saudi Arabia at the 2026 World Cup was a shock. Football is great because it can make every plan meaningless. And the FIFA election in March could be a shock in its own way. Infantino is the only candidate, but the deadline until November 18 remains. Anyone who wants to challenge him has time to prepare. Former FIFA officials, continental football leaders, and even people who once worked inside FIFA's commercial system could offer a different vision. An election with only one candidate usually receives little attention. But this time, the attention is on reform. If Infantino is re-elected with a reform commitment, he will not be able to back down easily. His promises will be tested through every action. If he is re-elected and everything continues in silence, the credibility of the whole process will collapse. At 42, I still write about football with the belief that stories of power are the real stories of football. On the pitch, one can hide a mistake with a great save. But in the corridors of power, there is no net to stop a ball from going through. Infantino's letter is a long shot. It could produce the best goal of his tenure, or it could drift wide in an embarrassing way. Fans hate opacity. They hate feeling deceived. And if FIFA keeps repeating the circle of reform, promise and scandal, a large part of fans could turn away from FIFA, even as they love their own teams. This is the real threat to global football, and Infantino is trying to stop it. In March, the answer will be clear. But before that, watch the small signals: whether European associations meet privately, whether a third party is selected for the assessment, and whether preliminary results are released before the election. Those signals say more than Infantino's letter. A long-serving leader usually does not give up power easily. But a smart leader knows how to share power at the right time in order to keep it longer. Maybe Infantino is doing that. Maybe he is giving up part of his control in exchange for the legitimacy of the whole system. And maybe he is creating a reform forum just so no one can replace him. Either way, this letter has changed the landscape. FIFA can no longer deny that there are problems in its decision-making process. Member associations have every reason to speak up. And Infantino, for the first time in years, has just placed himself in the position of someone asking to be heard. This could be the beginning of a new and turbulent term. In football, things change faster than expected. One morning, a president is as solid as a mountain. In the afternoon, a wrong statement can make him stagger. Infantino is no longer young, but he has enough experience to know that power does not come from the chair, but from trust. And the trust of 211 member associations is what he has just formally requested. Let us see if they give it to him.