The World Cup in Russia has sailed into view with a new Fifa captain at the helm, two and a half years since Sepp Blatter’s presidency crashed on the rocks of corruption and ethics breaches. Gianni Infantino seemed a callow, unlikely president when he was elevated to succeed the banned Blatter in February 2016 as, his tie slightly askew, he tapped his heart in wonderment at winning the vote of the Fifa congress.
Yet the better clue to how Infantino would operate has turned out not to be that moment of youthful elation but the ferocious ambition with which he had seized his opportunity. He had seemed a steady, bureaucratic type in his former blazer as the Uefa general secretary but he has surprised many with a bullish and ruthless approach to the Fifa presidency, when stewardship of the world’s most popular sport calls for diplomacy, especially now.
On Wednesday in Moscow Infantino will preside over his own second congress, whose most significant agenda item is another World Cup hosting vote – between the joint USA, Canada and Mexico bid, and Morocco’s pitch to be the destination for the 2026 tournament.
That vote, as well as Vladimir Putin’s preening at the World Cup kicking off in his country, and blockade by the regional neighbours of the 2022 host country, Qatar, illustrate the world’s dramatically increased volatility since the last, farcical vote eight years ago. Back then in a cold Zurich, the storms ahead were precipitated mostly by Fifa’s internal rottenness; 17 of the executive committee’s then 24 members have since admitted or been accused of serious corruption or ethics rule breaches.
Blatter has acknowledged since that he supported the choices of Russia to host this World Cup, then the USA for 2022; his contribution, he has said, to world peace, and his hope that Fifa – seriously – would be given a Nobel peace prize.
“I had already spoken about it with high level politicians: could we have Russia and USA in the World Cup?” Blatter told me, in my interview with him for my book about the corruption scandals, The Fall of the House of Fifa. “It would be good for these two countries, these powerhouses; they don’t like each other – then with football they can make a handshake for peace.”
He was furious when a majority voted for Qatar for 2022 and believed, rightly, it would bring Fifa a torrid reaction. However cheesily simplistic and idealised his view was then, now it looks fantastical, given the toxicity of Putin’s Russia, Donald Trump’s “America First” bombast and the FBI investigation into his links with Russia, the Brexit vote and advances of an anti-immigrant right across Europe, and the blockade of Qatar by the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.
The bidding process for the 2026 hosts has been beset more by accusations of political interference than corruption, particularly after Trump knocked out a tweet seen by many as characteristic bullying.
“It would be a shame if countries that we always support were to lobby against the US bid,” he tweeted in April. “Why should we be supporting these countries when they don’t support us (including at the United Nations)?”
Fifa responded by emphasising its guidelines against “undue influence” by governments, only for Trump to repeat his threats the following week, urging “African countries and countries throughout the world” to support the US bid, warning : “We will be watching very closely.”
FA likely to vote for US-led World Cup 2026 bid
The Football Association is poised to vote for the joint bid of the USA, Canada and Mexico to host the 2026 World Cup instead of Morocco unless any major late development shifts opinion.
The two bid committees are due to present their cases to Uefa members in Moscow today with the so called United team favourite to win. But the unexpected results of recent votes, with Russia and Qatar winning the 2018 and 2022 finals despite being the least suitable hosts on paper, mean an upset cannot be discounted.
The Guardian understands the FA is leaning towards voting for the United bid, which was judged by Fifa’s evaluation taskforce to be vastly superior to Morocco on technical grounds. It is the first bidding process since the FA endured the bruising defeat to Russia and the revelations of corruption within world football’s governing body which followed.
The exact results of the vote will be made public and the FA risks being accused of hypocrisy if it were to vote for the technically weaker Morocco bid at Fifa’s annual congress on Thursday. Morocco have committed to building nine stadiums in order to make their bid viable. They have previously bid unsuccessfully for the 1994, 1998, 2006 and 2010 World Cup finals. Martha Kelner
The decision will be the first under the reformed process introduced by Blatter, in which the 200-plus national football associations themselves will vote at the congress, not the chiefs on the executive committee, since replaced by the 36-person council.
That always seemed an odd fix to the risk of corruption, as all countries’ FAs now have the power to ask for favours, if they are inclined to. The process has been further brought into question given the official, published evaluation of the bids compiled by Fifa’s own senior five-man task force, which included the former Milan and Croatia striker Zvonimir Boban, now Fifa’s deputy secretary general responsible for football.
In their assessment of facilities, infrastructure and projected revenues, the north America prospect, with huge stadiums ready built and major sponsors said to be engaging, far eclipses that of Morocco, which would be taking on a major construction task.
Some senior Fifa figures believe this “technical” evaluation should determine a host but it will have to go to a popular vote. National FAs must declare who they voted for, but as under the old system, no reasons have to be given. There is enough popular sentiment for the idea of a north Africa tournament, and repulsion towards handing Trump a victory, to make the outcome in doubt. English FA representatives will watch closely, as part of deciding whether it is worth bidding again, to host the 2030 tournament, after the humiliating defeat they suffered in 2010 for their £21m bid to host this one.
Infantino has arrived in Moscow seriously rocked for the first time, forced to shelve his proposal to bounce through a new Club World Cup and League of Nations format. He had said it was backed by a $25bn guarantee over 12 years from multinational investors he had agreed not to identify, but the council refused to approve the plan. Uefa’s president, Aleksander Ceferin, was scathing, accusing “some people” of preparing “to sell the soul of football tournaments to nebulous private funds”.
Sign up for The Fiver, our football email with a regular World Cup edition.
Infantino’s credibility was seriously damaged for many at his first congress last year in Bahrain, when the two ethics committee chairmen and Miguel Maduro, the internationally respected governance committee chairman, were summarily told their tenures were not to continue. Infantino responded to their protests – that this was neutering the organisation’s clean-up operation – by talking like Trump of “fake news” and attacking “Fifa-bashing” in a dire speech.
Now Uefa sources say serious consideration is being given to not supporting Infantino for the presidential election which comes round next year. Fifa, which Blatter famously called his “little bateau”, needs a steady hand on the tiller.
