The pressure on FIFA President Gianni Infantino is intensifying, with more football federations and senior officials withdrawing their support after the departure of Chief Operating Officer Kevin Lamour.
The latest blow came from Sándor Csányi, president of the Hungarian Football Federation and one of FIFA’s vice-presidents. Csányi said Lamour’s unexpected dismissal was the “final straw” and formally withdrew his support for Infantino.
The development adds another layer to a growing governance crisis surrounding FIFA and puts fresh uncertainty around Infantino’s bid for a fourth presidential term in March 2027.
The Lamour fallout
FIFA confirmed that Lamour’s working relationship with the organisation ended on August 17, 2026, after roughly two years as COO. His departure came weeks after he publicly attacked Infantino’s controversial proposal to create a commercial subsidiary and sell a stake in FIFA’s future tournament rights to private investors.
Lamour had accused FIFA staff of being misled about the proposal and described it as essentially the project of one person. His criticism came as opposition to the plan was rapidly growing inside and outside FIFA.
Infantino eventually abandoned the proposal after the backlash. Reuters reported that the plan envisioned a roughly $20 billion subsidiary, with as much as a 20% stake potentially sold to private-equity investors for about $4.2 billion.
For Csányi, Lamour’s dismissal crossed a line.
He argued that Lamour had performed his duties to a high professional and ethical standard and said the circumstances surrounding his departure raised serious questions about FIFA’s leadership, professional judgment and ethical standards.
FIFA, meanwhile, has not publicly offered a detailed explanation for Lamour’s departure beyond confirming that the working relationship had ended.
Opposition is spreading beyond one FIFA official
The controversy is no longer limited to Lamour’s departure.
FIFA Council member Dejan Savićević of Montenegro also said his federation had withdrawn an earlier letter of support for Infantino’s candidacy. He cited concerns about communication, transparency and governance within FIFA.
Israel has also withdrawn its support for Infantino’s re-election, while Wales became the first national association to formally announce that it would no longer back him earlier this month. Scotland has likewise said it will not support Infantino’s re-election.
New Zealand has joined that growing list. Its football federation withdrew support for Infantino and called for an independent review of the abandoned commercial-rights proposal, saying confidence and trust in FIFA’s leadership had been damaged.
The opposition is particularly significant because UEFA, the Asian Football Confederation (AFC) and CONCACAF have all called for a review of Infantino’s leadership.
Together, those three confederations represent 136 of FIFA’s 211 member associations, although that does not automatically translate into a unified voting bloc in a presidential election.
But Infantino still has powerful allies
Despite the growing rebellion, it would be premature to declare Infantino’s presidency finished.
The Confederation of African Football (CAF) and CONMEBOL, South America’s governing body, continue to support him. Several Arab football associations have also publicly backed the FIFA president.
FIFA itself previously said its leadership had reaffirmed full support for Infantino during a management meeting in Morocco following the collapse of the commercial-rights proposal.
That means the battle heading toward the 2027 election remains unsettled.
Infantino still has a significant support base, but the political landscape around FIFA has clearly become more divided.
The term-limit controversy adds another front
Infantino is also facing questions over whether he should even be eligible to seek a fourth term.
FIFA’s rules limit presidents to three terms. Infantino has maintained that his first period in office, from 2016 to 2019, should not count because he completed an interrupted mandate following his initial election after the resignation of Sepp Blatter.
Human-rights organisation FairSquare has asked FIFA’s Governance, Audit and Compliance Committee to rule Infantino ineligible, arguing that allowing his first stint not to count would undermine FIFA’s term-limit rules.
That issue could become increasingly important as the 2027 election approaches.
Why Lamour’s exit matters
Lamour’s departure is bigger than the loss of one senior FIFA executive because it has become a symbol of the wider dispute over how FIFA is governed and how much power is concentrated around its president.
Human Rights Watch and the Sport & Rights Alliance have criticised Lamour’s departure and raised concerns about whether FIFA is becoming less tolerant of internal dissent. Labour representatives also pointed to Lamour’s role in advancing workers’ rights within FIFA tournaments.
The dispute therefore extends beyond money and commercial strategy.
At its core is a much larger question:
Who gets to shape the future of world football — FIFA’s president, its elected member associations, or a growing coalition of regional football powers demanding greater transparency and oversight?
That question could dominate FIFA politics long after the abandoned investment proposal disappears from the headlines.
What happens next?
The immediate focus will be on whether more national associations follow Hungary, Wales, Scotland, Israel and New Zealand in withdrawing support for Infantino.
The bigger test comes in March 2027, when FIFA members are scheduled to vote on the presidency.
Infantino remains a powerful figure with substantial backing, particularly in Africa and South America. But the latest defections demonstrate that his once seemingly secure path toward another term is no longer guaranteed.
The collapse of the commercial-rights plan may have been the first major warning.
Lamour’s dismissal may now have transformed that controversy into a much larger leadership battle.
And with FIFA’s presidential election approaching, the question is no longer simply whether Infantino can win another term.
It is whether the coalition gathering against him can turn growing dissatisfaction into enough votes to actually change the leadership of world football.
Leave a Reply