Why Infantinos World Cup…

Just prior to the cancellation of FIFA’s contentious plan to commercialize the World Cups and other major tournaments, women’s soccer was poised to be ground zero in an intensifying dispute. Following the leak of FIFA President Gianni Infantino’s FIFA Forward Enterprise (FFE) proposals, which drew widespread criticism, UEFA announced a boycott of FIFA events—including the 2030 World Cup—beginning with women’s tournaments.

With less than a year until the 2027 Women’s World Cup kicks off in Brazil and European qualifying playoffs commencing in October, the fallout could have deeply affected youth women’s soccer. The FIFA U20 Women’s World Cup, set for Sept. 5 in Poland, precedes the men’s and women’s U17 tournaments in Qatar and Morocco, respectively, later this year.

UEFA’s decision was crucial in upholding the integrity of international soccer, yet FIFA’s proposals and the ensuing confrontation threatened to reverse years of advancement in women’s soccer. A collective outrage among players, coaches (including USWNT head coach Emma Hayes), agents, and national associations has built since the initial news broke, and FIFA’s recent retreat does little to assuage these tensions.

After years of unprecedented growth, investment, and global interest, women’s soccer found itself caught in a political tug-of-war between Infantino and the broader soccer community—one that could have dire consequences.

Reasons Behind UEFA’s Stance and Potential Dilemmas

The FIFA initiative, spearheaded by Infantino, aimed to offload a 20% minority stake in a new commercial entity, the FFE, which would oversee FIFA’s most lucrative assets, including broadcast rights, sponsorship deals, ticketing, and hospitality for both men’s and women’s World Cups, along with other FIFA events.

Critics suggested that this plan risked prioritizing profit over the integrity of soccer’s flagship events, potentially resulting in increased ticket prices, more frequent World Cups, and disregarding growing concerns regarding player fatigue and welfare as well as fan accessibility.

UEFA’s boycott, supported by Concacaf and the Asian Football Confederation (AFC), was the most significant response to FIFA’s proposals, ultimately unraveling Infantino’s plans. The ramifications of a potential boycott would have been profound for any World Cup, but women’s soccer is especially susceptible. A Women’s World Cup without Europe is hard to imagine, as it would exclude reigning champions Spain, Euro champions England, two-time winners Germany, as well as historic teams like France, Sweden, and Netherlands. Missing six of the top ten teams ranked by FIFA would be detrimental to the tournament.

The significance of such a loss is immense. Three of the nine nations that have won the Women’s World Cup—Norway, Germany, and Spain—would be absent without UEFA’s participation, along with three of the four semifinalists from the 2023 tournament. For the 2027 edition, only two frontrunners, the United States and host Brazil, are outside Europe.

Although FIFA’s intentions were commercially driven, the Women’s World Cup’s allure relies heavily on the involvement of Europe’s leading players and teams.

Envisioning a tournament devoid of Ballon d’Or winners like Alexia Putellas and Aitana Bonmatí, or England’s Lionesses, would significantly lessen the tournament’s prestige and commercial viability.

A World Cup without all confederations would not be a true World Cup, challenging FIFA’s governance and the legitimacy of its premier tournament.

play

Has Infantino’s position as FIFA president become ‘untenable’?

The Importance of the Women’s World Cup

The 2023 FIFA Women’s World Cup generated approximately $570 million in revenue, allowing the event to break even financially, with commercial rights contributing the lion’s share of that figure at $455.9 million.

Despite this success, the women’s game remains largely dependent on the World Cup as its main financial driver. The tournament featured a record $110 million prize pool in 2023, distributed among national federations and players, with FIFA directly compensating players for the first time.

Payouts ranged from $30,000 for group stage participation to $270,000 for the tournament winners. Champions Spain received around $4.2 million, translating to roughly $270,000 per player, while runners-up England received just over $3 million, with each Lioness earning about $195,000.

However, prize money is only one aspect of players’ earnings during a World Cup. Sponsorships and commercial deals often skyrocket during the tournament. For instance, England’s squad spent months negotiating with the FA over bonus payments before finalizing an agreement.

FIFA’s commitment to providing each player with at least $30,000 for group stage participation was especially meaningful for players from lower-ranked or developing nations, where many still juggle modest salaries or work alternate jobs to make ends meet. For these athletes, World Cup prizes could represent a life-changing financial uplift rather than just a bonus.

The financial contrast with the men’s game is stark, as their World Cup features significantly higher prize money, though FIFA aims to achieve equity in player payments over time. However, most male players generally earn their income primarily from club contracts.

Clubs gain financially through FIFA’s “Club Benefits Programme,” disbursing over $11.3 million to more than 1,000 clubs for releasing players. For example, Barcelona and Chelsea women received nearly $250,000 each.

While these figures may appear small relative to the men’s game, they offer crucial income in women’s football, helping clubs stay competitive and supporting the broader ecosystem that allows the World Cup to showcase the sport at its peak.

Avoiding Conflict in Women’s Soccer

Sources have communicated to ESPN that such a situation would not have occurred a year before a men’s World Cup, as the potential for disruption would provoke widespread anxiety. They contend FIFA underestimated the implications for women’s soccer. Reports indicate that Infantino’s FFE plan to member associations spanned 25 pages yet did not mention women’s soccer even once.

Women’s soccer has actively sought to align itself with progressive movements and has consistently stood united on issues beyond the field. The USWNT achieved equal pay, players globally have spoken out against injustices, and there was a unified global response following the incident involving Jenni Hermoso and former RFEF president Luis Rubiales during the 2023 World Cup celebrations.

Providing FIFA with greater commercial autonomy could have led to an overburdened tournament schedule, more competitions, and further stress on players already concerned about excessive workloads. Concerns about rising ticket prices and travel costs that deter fans from attending matches also emerged.

Fortunately, UEFA’s strong opposition and resistance from several confederations to FIFA’s proposal have compelled Infantino to retreat ahead of a crucial phase for the Women’s World Cup, minimizing potential long-term impacts.

Though recent developments represent a pivotal moment for both Infantino and the soccer landscape at large, it is women’s soccer that is once again at the forefront. Had Infantino’s wishes materialized, women’s soccer would have borne the brunt of a bitter governance struggle—which does not inspire optimism for its future.