Seven outrageous ways Infantino’s grubby plan will ruin the World Cup

Fifa presents… the 128-team Coca-Cola 2036 World Cup, powered by Aramco and co-hosted by the United States and Saudi Arabia. Genuinely: maybe. Football should not be Gianni Infantino’s to sell and yet the Fifa president has set about seismic plans to change the game as we know it. On Tuesday it emerged Fifa intends to “expand football development” by selling a minority stake in a new company – Fifa Forward Enterprise (FFE) – that would run events including the World Cup and Club World Cup. The sell-off would supposedly increase funding for every Fifa nation, with associations warned they will be denied a slice of the pie if they oppose the plans. As it stands, that could include Uefa nations after European football’s governing body said the proposals “crossed a line”, but that may not deter Infantino, who has seen the dollar signs and reportedly taken counsel from Donald Trump’s administration regarding the plan. Here’s how it could change football for the worse… A World Cup every two years Arsene Wenger has championed the plan for a World Cup every two years (Photo: Reuters) An idea first touted in 2021 and championed by former Arsenal boss Arsene Wenger, the possibility of holding a men’s World Cup every two years would only increase if this plan goes ahead. Private capital demands growth, and with JP Morgan working alongside Fifa, those hoping for a healthy return on their investment will want to explore ways of making greater profits. So why have a World Cup every four years when it could be two? It is a horrendous idea that vastly diminishes the prestige of winning the tournament, but hey, it would boost bank balances for those, literally, invested. 64 World Cup teams – and beyond? The confetti had barely settled at the New York New Jersey Stadium after the World Cup final when Infantino hyped up the prospect of expanding the tournament to 64 teams. “If you don’t give smaller countries the chance to participate in the World Cup, they also lose the incentive to keep improving,” he said. But who is to say Infantino will stop at 64? More nations, more money, right? Make it a 128-team bonanza? Heck, there are 211 member associations, so let’s go for a four-month World Cup extravaganza and let ChatGPT worry about the format. No one would rule out Infantino one-day staging an every-nation World Cup, although he does have one major obstacle… A World Cup without Uefa A World Cup without Spain is possible if a boycott on the cards (Photo: Getty) The biggest hindrance to Fifa’s plans could be Uefa’s opposition, with European nations set to discuss a World Cup boycott should the spin-off venture go ahead. Five of the past six World Cup winners have been European. The final has only ever been contested by European or South American nations. So, obviously, a World Cup without European nations is not a World Cup. Uefa knows that, making for a possible civil war. Saudi Arabia and the United States share hosting? Who stages a 64-team, 96-team, 128-team World Cup? The bigger the tournament, the smaller the pool of possible hosts, and if Uefa are out of the equation then options are limited further. There is every chance it goes to those dancing to Fifa’s tune, or in reality, the nations Infantino has cosied up to, e.g. the US and Saudi Arabia. Already it appeared that Infantino bowed to Trump’s call to suspend Folarin Balogun’s one-game ban, having already handed the leader of the free world the coveted Fifa Peace Prize in December 2025, a month before the US launched airstrikes on Venezuela – and then Iran in February. Saudi Arabia, meanwhile, will host the 2034 World Cup. They were the sole bidders, hinting towards a future where only those with deep pockets can stage the event. Trust plummets further The Balogun saga exposed Infantino’s apparent favouritism, while dressing up the ad breaks as hydration breaks fooled few and angered many. Add to that various unfounded conspiracy theories, including Argentina getting favourable decisions to ensure Lionel Messi went as far as possible, and the latest World Cup was engulfed in deep mistrust. Throw further commercialisation into the equation and trust will only plummet further. Future generations blinded For the older generation, the World Cup was a 16-team tournament featuring the very, very best. Even when it expanded to 32, millennials growing up appreciated a neat format where competition was fierce, mistakes were punished and “groups of death” were a regularity. Football was front and centre, but the 2026 edition was a window into what is to come, a tournament broken into quarters where Erling Haaland, Kylian Mbappe and Lionel Messi get to stat-pad. Future generations will never get to see the World Cup in its purest form, but while Haaland and Mbappe keep scoring, their thirst will be quenched and younger fans will be blind to what football’s primary principles are meant to be. Read more Tim Rich: The World Cup’s very existence hangs by a thread On The Road: 101 things I learned by driving 7,835 miles across Trump’s America Ticket prices sky rocket Reports suggest Fifa will announce record revenues from the 2026 World Cup, and ticket prices will have played a huge part. England and Scotland fans forked out thousands to follow the group stages alone, while tickets for the final were around four times the price of the final at Qatar 2022. It therefore became a tournament for the mega-rich with frequent shots of VIPs in boxes and influencers littered around the stands. That won’t change unless prices come down, but if anything, they are more likely to go up.