FIFA’s money machine is hurting football, here’s why Infantino will earn re-election

Gianni Infantino was never supposed to become football’s all-powerful figure. Yet he emerged from the chaos of FIFA’s 2015 corruption crisis. He was UEFA’s general secretary and was a close friend of Michel Platini. The crisis exposed the corruption and reckless behaviour at the highest levels of FIFA. Heads rolled. Careers ended. Trust in football’s global governing body was shattered.

In February 2016, Infantino won the FIFA presidency. He promised to rebuild trust. Nine years later, the question is no longer whether Infantino has transformed FIFA. The more uncomfortable question is what he has transformed it into.

His expansion of the World Cup from 32 to 48 teams was a masterstroke for broadcast revenue. FIFA’s cut of ticket sales rose from 10 to 30%, and FIFA’s commercial power has exploded.

FIFA’s revenues are expected to reach $19.5 billion ($14 billion USD) during the next four-year cycle, while Infantino has repeatedly strengthened his position among the 211 national associations that ultimately decide who runs world football.

His political survival has become almost as impressive as FIFA’s financial growth, and that is where the real story begins.

FIFA is richer than ever. So why does football feel short-changed?

The numbers are staggering. FIFA expects to generate at least $18 billion ($13 billion USD) in revenue across the 2019–2026 four-year cycle. The inaugural expanded Club World Cup alone added close to $3 billion ($2 billion USD) to FIFA’s revenue.

That is an extraordinary amount of money for a governing body whose purpose is to develop football across the world. FIFA has always maintained that it is a non-profit organisation and that much of its revenue is reinvested into football. My biggest issue is that the math doesn’t line up.

FIFA says its Forward program will reach $3.75 billion ($2.7 billion USD) during the 2027–30 cycle. That money helps fund the operations and development of FIFA’s 211 member associations. On a simple division, that works out to roughly $4.4 million per association per year.

For smaller football nations, that can be transformational. For established football nations carrying enormous professional, grassroots and infrastructure costs, the picture is very different.

Take Football Australia, which reportedly recorded a $15.4 million loss in its last financial year. Of FIFA’s projected revenue, 19% will be earmarked for member associations.

FIFA obviously has major tournament costs, employees, administration and other expenses. But its reserves tell another story. Across the last two cycles, FIFA’s predicted increase in reserves was approximately $139 million ($100 million USD).

In reality, it added approximately $3.3 billion ($2.4 billion USD). Member associations aren’t getting the funding they need. How much reserve is needed for a non-profit? But this is where politics comes into play.

Top footballing nations such as Brazil, France and England get one vote. But so do governing bodies representing some of the smallest footballing nations.

Their financial contributions to FIFA are worlds apart, but their political weight is the same. Infantino knows that.

The price of supporting Infantino

Infantino’s salary in 2025 reached roughly $8.3 million ($6 million USD). Already more than well compensated, the idea then came to create the FIFA Forward Enterprise proposal. The plan would have created a commercial subsidiary capable of selling a stake in FIFA’s commercial operations to outside investors.

It was eventually withdrawn after public backlash from UEFA and CONCACAF, with the former threatening to boycott the tournament. Other confederations such as the AFC stopped short of rejecting the proposal publicly but expressed concern. Infantino reportedly stood to receive approximately $41 million ($30 million USD) from the transaction.

That is the point at which questions about FIFA’s commercial ambitions became questions about governance. Why should the president of football’s global governing body personally benefit from a commercial transaction involving FIFA’s most valuable assets?

Even if the transaction could be commercially justified, the optics were extraordinary. Therefore, UEFA’s opposition plays a critical role. UEFA has now taken its battle with Infantino beyond political disagreement.

It has decided to take the legal route. UEFA has issued documents in New York and Florida seeking criminal mismanagement tied to FFE. It is far too early to know whether FIFA or Infantino himself could face penalties. One of football’s most powerful confederations is openly challenging FIFA’s president. That does not mean UEFA can remove him, and that is the problem.

Infantino is wounded. But re-election is very possible

UEFA is openly at war with Infantino, and with Italy the latest to withdraw its support for the president, there is pressure on his candidacy at the March elections. Potential rivals could emerge with UEFA and potentially CONCACAF support.

But none of that guarantees Infantino’s defeat. Because the election is not decided by UEFA. It is decided by FIFA’s 211 member associations.

Major players within the AFC, including Qatar and Saudi Arabia, have not necessarily aligned with UEFA’s position on FIFA and with Saudi Arabia set to host the 2034 World Cup, while discussions around future World Cup hosting continue. The relationships between FIFA and powerful Asian associations will remain politically significant. Infantino only requires 106 votes for re-election.

Infantino has spent years building relationships with the associations that hold them. This is not about whether every association believes Infantino is the perfect president. It is about whether enough associations believe FIFA under Infantino delivers more for them than FIFA without him.

That is a very different question, and it is why I believe Infantino remains the favourite heading into March 2027.

The real losers are the fans

This is the part that gets lost in the politics. The fans and football supporters did not ask for FIFA to become a financial empire. They did not ask for endless expansion to the World Cup. They did not ask for more commercial complexity or for the organisation to sell its stakes. Fans did not ask for football’s governing body to become a battleground between federations and investors.

Fans want football, meaningful competitions and affordable prices.

They want trustworthy leadership, and they want to believe that the people running the game actually understand that football belongs to its supporters. Previous administrations were plagued by scandals, allegations of corruption and questions about governance. Infantino inherited that culture. The concern is that instead of dismantling the political machine, he has become exceptionally good at operating it. FIFA generates billions while its president earns millions.

Confederations and national associations fight over money and political influence.

Supporters are increasingly left paying the price.

That is the greatest contradiction in world football.

The danger is that FIFA becomes so financially essential to national associations that challenging its leadership becomes too costly and risky for confederations who hold the majority of the votes.

That is not healthy. A governing body should be accountable to football. Infantino’s greatest achievement may ultimately be that he has made himself incredibly difficult to replace. He has placed himself in hot water with his action, but if he wins again in 2027, the message for modern football is clear. The power isn’t with the people, with the fans. It’s in the votes and politics.

Previous ArticleNext Article

‘We’re on our own’: Malvern City’s fight for a fair go

At Malvern City Football Club, the problem isn’t finding girls who want to play football.

It is finding appropriate facilities for their growing cohort of young girls to play at.

The club now has close to 100 girls in its female program, built up over the past six years. But at Sir Zelman Cowen Park, which Malvern City has called home for decades, there are no dedicated female change rooms or toilets.

Instead, there are shared facilities, public toilets and, according to club President John Hatzis, situations in which parents, coaches and team managers have had to effectively stand guard so girls can use the toilets without others entering.

“The problem we’ve got is that the public toilets are often locked, or they’re just not accessible,” Hatzis told Soccerscene

The result, he says, is a bizarre and frankly uncomfortable workaround: adults physically blocking the toilets so girls can use them.

That is the human face of what has become a much bigger argument about sporting infrastructure in the City of Stonnington.

It is the sort of arrangement that might have been observed decades ago.

Not something we see in 2026.

Malvern City isn’t a small club asking ratepayers to build it a palace.

It has more than 800 registered players. Its female program is approaching 100 participants. Its junior high-performance program is thriving, while its senior men’s side just earned promotion to VPL1.

And yet its president says the club has spent years being told, essentially, to wait.

“We’re doing everything right as a club,” Hatzis says.

“But every year around this time, we get teams of girls, we get teams of boys coming over to us and we’re saying, ‘We can’t help you. We just don’t have the facilities.’”

That should concern more than just football people.

Where Stonnington chooses to spend

Stonnington is not a municipality that pinches its pennies on sport – far from it.

The council recently completed the Stonnington Sports Centre at Percy Treyvaud Reserve, a $49.9 million project described by council as its largest-ever investment in community sport. The project delivered new facilities for tennis, lawn bowls, cricket, lacrosse, netball and basketball, as well as four indoor courts and more than 200 undercover car spaces. A project where the council contributed $45.9 million.

There are also millions more in the current and forward capital programs.

The 2026-27 budget includes $600,000 for maintenance and renewal works at Malvern Valley Golf Course. Sports-ground asset renewal and oval reconstruction programs amount to about $13.5 million over the forward program to be carried over the next decade. Pavilion renewal is worth roughly $7.3 million over the same period, while outdoor tennis facilities have a forward renewal program of about $3.3 million.

There is a roughly $10.4 million forward program attached to Central Park Pavilion and about $7 million for Waverley Oval Pavilion.

None of this means football is entitled to an equal slice of every dollar.

Many of these facilities are shared between sports. A cricket oval can also be an AFL ground. A sportsground renewal program can benefit soccer as well as football. Money allocated to floodlights or pavilions cannot simply be stamped with one sport’s logo.

A $66 million gap — and a question of priorities

There is no doubt Stonnington, too, has a legitimate argument on the other side.

Council has identified an enormous backlog of sporting infrastructure needs. Its own figures suggest about $124 million in required investment, with only about $58 million currently funded over the coming decade.

That leaves a gap of roughly $66 million.

The council cannot fix everything at once.

But that is precisely why the argument over Malvern City is worth having.

Hatzis does not dispute there are competing demands. In fact, one of the more revealing parts of our conversation was his admission that football itself bears some responsibility.

For years, he says, football clubs have simply found a way to survive.

“The squeaky wheel receives the oil,” he said.

“Obviously, we haven’t been squeaking enough over many decades and we’ve just made do with what we’ve got.”

That is a remarkably candid admission from a club president trying to make a case against his local council.

But Hatzis believes patience has run out.

A decade of planning, but no clear timeline

Malvern City has been at Zelman Cowen for almost half a century. The club says the pavilion dates back to the late 1980s, and despite repeated approaches to council, there is still no funded redevelopment of the facility in the current budget.

The council is now undertaking a 10-year Sport and Recreation Plan for Zelman Cowen, following consultation with more than 400 community members. The park contains five sports fields covering roughly 47,500 square metres and caters for football, Australian rules football, baseball, cricket, athletics and ultimate frisbee.

Council acknowledges that the precinct is under increasing pressure and that its future planning needs to consider accessibility, safety, gender equity and universal design.

But planning is not building.

And a plan without funding is a very long way from a toilet that actually works.

That is Hatzis’ frustration.

“We’re being constantly told that there’s a plan to redevelop Zelman Cowen,” he says.

“But the problem is that there is no funding.”

His estimate is that Malvern City could be seven-to-ten years away from seeing meaningful redevelopment.

Fair Access in policy, barriers in practice

That is where the council’s own rhetoric around women’s sport becomes important.

Stonnington’s sports infrastructure planning recognises that many older sporting facilities were not designed for equitable participation by women and girls.

That is not an abstract policy problem at Zelman Cowen.

There are girls standing outside a toilet.

There are parents being asked to intervene.

And there are young players who, he fears, could eventually decide that the inconvenience isn’t worth it.

“If they’re not willing to fund it, then how long can clubs fund it?” he asks.

That is the question Stonnington needs to answer.

Not because Malvern City should automatically jump to the front of the queue, but because the council needs to be able to explain why it has placed this particular queue in the order it has.

The comparison with other sporting facilities is inevitably going to be uncomfortable.

Hatzis points to the state-of-the-art facilities available to some AFL and cricket clubs. He points to major investment at Toorak Park and the new Stonnington Sports Centre.

His argument is that Malvern City would be prepared to meet council halfway.

Malvern City is willing to meet council halfway

The club would lobby state and federal governments. It would seek private funding. It would even ask its own support base to contribute.

“We’d be happy to go and lobby the state and federal government to help us with the funding,” Hatzis says.

“And even creating some private funding. I’d be happy to get our support base to help with that also.”

That matters, because this isn’t simply a demand that ratepayers write Malvern City’s club a cheque.

It is a demand for a pathway. Give us a plan. Give us a timeframe. Give us something to work towards.

Instead, Hatzis says, the message from council has become increasingly difficult to accept.

“The communication coming down the line that we don’t have any funding is absolutely wearing thin.”

Football’s missing support

One of the more damning parts of our conversation wasn’t even about the council.

Hatzis says he has repeatedly contacted Football Victoria seeking support. He says he has been told someone would contact him to begin an engagement process and that Malvern City is an important part of the fabric of Victorian football.

That call is yet to come, which raises an uncomfortable possibility: perhaps Malvern City’s problem isn’t just that it has failed to convince Stonnington; perhaps it’s that football itself has historically been too willing to accept second-best facilities and making do.

Football has grown enormously in the past 25 years, while girl’s and women’s football in particular has exploded across the past decade. Clubs are increasingly expected to provide pathways from junior participation to elite competition.

Yet the infrastructure beneath that growth has not kept pace.

A story bigger than one club

That is where Stonnington’s own Fair Access Policy becomes particularly difficult to reconcile with what is happening at Zelman Cowen.

The council says the policy is designed to address “known barriers” experienced by women and girls in accessing community sport facilities, before acknowledging in its budget that implementing Fair Access will require “significant new funding”.

It is a remarkable admission: the council recognises the barriers, recognises that its sporting infrastructure needs to change, yet the girls at Malvern City are still being asked to wait for the money to make that change happen.

Malvern City’s story is therefore bigger than one pavilion.

It is about what happens when a sport grows faster than the facilities designed to accommodate it.

And it is about whether councils can continue to promote female participation while asking girls to accept facilities that would be considered unacceptable in other parts of community life.

Stonnington says it has limited resources.

That is undoubtedly true.

But scarcity does not remove the responsibility to explain the choices being made.

If there is $600,000 available for one year’s renewal and maintenance at a golf course, if millions are flowing through tennis, pavilion and sports-ground programs, and if a $49.9 million flagship sporting centre can be delivered, then telling Malvern City simply that there is “no funding” is not really an answer.

It is only the beginning of the question.

Why that facility?

Why now?

Why them?

And why not Zelman Cowen?

Malvern City has spent decades making do.

Its president admits the club has not always been loud enough.

But over the last decade, that has changed.

“We’re doing everything right as a club,” Hatzis says.

“We need to be heard”

Perhaps the real test for Stonnington now is not whether it can find enough money to fix every sporting facility in the municipality.

It clearly cannot.

The test is whether, when the council sits down to decide who waits another decade and who moves forward. Malvern City, a club with more than 800 players, a senior men’s program that is among Victoria’s elite, and a growing cohort of girls can make a convincing enough case to finally move up the list.

Because asking girls to wait years for a proper place to change is not a particularly convincing way to build the future of women’s sport.

Netflix’s Women’s World Cup deal puts IMG’s technology in the spotlight

Netflix’s first exclusive football deal will see the next year’s FIFA Women’s World Cup at the centre of it’s live-sport strategy. The US-streaming service company has appointed IMG as its production partner for all 64 matches in Brazil, as well as more than 100 hours of live studio programming. The deal includes English and Spanish coverage for viewers within the US, and English and French-language coverage for those in Canada. IMG will also support Netflix’s coverage of the tournament’s draw in December.

The 2027 Women’s World Cup runs from June 24 to July 25 across eight host cities, and will be the first edition to feature 32 teams. The scale of the tournament makes it an ambitious first foray into sports broadcasting for Netflix – which means IMG’s involvement will be of great significance.

IMG’s production engine

IMG has built its reputation on producing and distributing live sport at scale. It’s Stockley Park, London facility includes broadcast studios, production galleries, edit suites and facilities for radio, podcasting, dubbing and visual effects. The company has worked across major properties including the Premier League, Major League Soccer and other international sporting events.

For a World Cup, this infrastructure provides more than a place to make television; it creates a central point where production teams can manage feeds, graphics, replays, commentary, editing and distribution while events are taking place thousands of kilometres away.

Remote production is the key

The most important technology for a tournament spread across eight Brazilian cities is connectivity. IMG has invested in remote-production workflows that allow production teams to work across locations, rather than putting every specialist inside each stadium. Its wider production operation has used fibre, satellite, cloud and IP-based connectivity to move live signals between venues and production centres.

That model can reduce the amount of equipment and specialist staff required at every venue while allowing senior producers, directors, replay operators and graphics teams to work from centralised facilities. IMG has also demonstrated long-distance IP production, including a 20,000-kilometre link between Tokyo and London that carried uncompressed, low-latency video. For Netflix, those capabilities are particularly relevant. The platform is building a single viewing experience for audiences in two markets, but the raw ingredients will come from stadiums spread across Brazil. A resilient network becomes just as important as the cameras themselves.

From stadium to stream

The technology chain does not end when the pictures leave the venue. A modern sports production operation has to manage ingest, replay, media asset management, graphics, audio, quality control, archiving and transmission. IMG’s facilities have been built around those workflows, with master control and transmission capabilities alongside post-production and archive operations.

That infrastructure also gives IMG the ability to turn the live tournament into a wider stream of content. A goal can become a replay, a highlight, a social clip or part of a studio package without waiting for the match to finish. For Netflix, that fits a platform built around on-demand discovery as much as live viewing.

A new test for Netflix

Netflix has already made a significant investment in football through documentaries and other programming. The 2027 Women’s World Cup takes it up a level. FIFA describes the agreement as the first competition Netflix has acquired in full, making the tournament a major test of its live sports operation. IMG therefore has a job that goes beyond producing 64 matches; it must help Netflix build the technical backbone for a month-long, multi-venue broadcast, while maintaining consistent production standards across languages and locations.

The viewer may simply press play and see a World Cup match appear instantly. Behind that button will be a complex network of cameras, connectivity, control rooms, production systems, people and data. That is the real significance of Netflix’s IMG deal: the streamer is bringing the tournament to its platform, but IMG is providing much of the machinery that can make a global football event feel seamless.

Most Popular Topics

Editor Picks

Send this to a friend