Norway demand Infantino resign as Mexico and Argentina back FIFA president — and the FA is already out

Norway have said the quiet part out loud. Their federation has called on FIFA president Gianni Infantino to resign following his aborted attempt to sell stakes in the World Cup to private investors — going further than England, Wales, Croatia and Albania, all of whom have withdrawn support without demanding he goes. Mexico and Argentina, meanwhile, have publicly backed the 56-year-old. Less than a year out from the 2026 World Cup, world football’s governing body is split down the middle, and England’s Football Association is already on the wrong side of Infantino’s ledger.

What Norway are actually accusing Infantino of

The Norwegian Football Federation want Gianni Infantino to resign over the aborted plan to sell stakes in the World Cup to private investors. Their position, reported by BBC Sport on 7 August 2026, is that Infantino no longer holds the confidence required to lead FIFA — a legitimacy argument rather than a policy disagreement.

Lise Klaveness, the federation’s president, is no opportunist. She has been one of the sharpest public critics of FIFA governance for years, raising transparency and human rights concerns directly at FIFA’s own congresses. That consistency is exactly why the call carries weight in Europe.

The objection is structural. Selling equity in the World Cup would convert football’s biggest collective asset into a tradeable financial product. It is that principle, more than any figure attached to the deal, that triggered the revolt.

England, Wales, Croatia and Albania: withdrawing support without pulling the trigger

Four federations — England, Wales, Croatia and Albania — have withdrawn support for Infantino without explicitly calling for his resignation. Norway are alone in demanding he goes. The distinction matters enormously in football politics: withdrawing support signals disapproval, demanding resignation opens a constitutional fight.

For the FA, this is a significant move regardless. English football is one of FIFA’s most valuable commercial assets, and a public break from the president is not something Wembley does casually.

But stopping short of a resignation call also reflects cold arithmetic. FIFA controls development funding, tournament hosting and calendar decisions. Very few associations want to lead that fight alone and absorb the consequences on their own.

Why Mexico and Argentina are standing by the president

Mexico are co-hosting the 2026 World Cup alongside the United States and Canada, and a leadership crisis at FIFA months before kick-off would be an operational and reputational nightmare for a host nation with stadiums, logistics and national prestige on the line. Their backing is, first and foremost, self-protection.

Argentina, the reigning world champions, carry enormous political capital within CONMEBOL. Their support makes a unified South American front against Infantino far harder to assemble — and that is the coalition his opponents would actually need.

The map right now is simple: opposition is European, support is from the Americas. Until that changes, Infantino has room to survive.

What it means for the Premier League and English football

The immediate Premier League concern is not who sits in Zurich but what model they are selling. Opening a FIFA competition to private equity ownership would set a precedent about who owns football’s biggest properties — a live question in England, where multi-club ownership and investment funds have already reshaped the top flight.

The fixture calendar is the sharper edge. Premier League clubs release more internationals than any league on earth, and every expansion — a 48-team World Cup, an enlarged Club World Cup — comes out of players’ recovery time and clubs’ squad planning. English clubs have pushed back on FIFA’s calendar before and will do so again.

There is also leverage at stake. The FA is one of the few associations with the commercial weight to be heard at FIFA. Having withdrawn support, the question now is whether it converts that stance into an organised bloc or lets Norway carry the argument alone.

Can Infantino actually be removed?

Not by statements. Removing a FIFA president runs through the organisation’s own statutory processes and, in practice, through Congress, where every member association holds one vote. That one-association-one-vote structure inherently protects the incumbent: Europe’s biggest federations count for no more than the smallest members of other confederations.

Norway can start the conversation, but they cannot start a vote on their own. Ousting a sitting president would require a broad cross-continental coalition and, realistically, an entire confederation turning.

So the number to watch over the coming weeks is not how many statements get published. It is whether a single significant association outside Europe breaks ranks. That would be the moment this stops being a European protest and becomes a genuine threat.

FAQ