Gianni Infantino has met his Icarus moment. The FIFA president's plan to sell stakes in the World Cup was revealed on Tuesday. By Friday night, it was in tatters. The backlash was swift, unified, and unprecedented — and it may prove to be the most consequential crisis of his decade-long reign.

UEFA threatened a boycott of all FIFA competitions by its 55 member nations unless the scheme was permanently abandoned. Concacaf, football's governing body for North and Central America and the Caribbean, rejected the proposal. The Asian Football Confederation condemned it. Even Infantino's senior advisor, Carlos Cordeiro, resigned in protest. FIFA initially insisted it would push on to a vote, but less than 24 hours later, it pulled the plug.

"It has become clear that the project has created divisions of a nature that, regardless of the level of support, are no longer in the interest of the objective set out in the first place," a FIFA statement read. "As a result, this proposal will not proceed."

Blindsided from within

One of the most damning revelations came from Bernd Neuendorf, president of the German Football Association and a member of the FIFA Council, who revealed he first learned of Infantino's plans by reading about them in the media.

"This news has surprised us," Neuendorf told Kicker. "I'm also a member of the FIFA Council — FIFA's highest body — and one would expect to be informed in advance about such a significant decision, about such a process. Especially since it's such a far-reaching project. It's so comprehensive that it must have been discussed within FIFA for months, a year, or even longer. It was never a topic of discussion in the council. I was very surprised, and also annoyed, that we had to find out about something like this from the press."

The FIFA Council, on which Neuendorf sits, has 37 members with representatives from all of the game's six continental federations. It is world football's most senior executive body. Yet there is no evidence it was involved in any of the planning behind FIFA Forward Enterprises (FFE), which has reportedly been at a conceptual stage for more than a year.

A pattern of unilateral behaviour

This episode, however, is not isolated. It conforms to what critics describe as a growing pattern of unilateral behaviour by Infantino, who increasingly appears to see himself not as an administrator but as football's broker — the owner of its power and the arbiter for what it should be used for.

When United States President Donald Trump was awarded FIFA's inaugural Peace Prize last December, no evidence was presented to show that decision went beyond Infantino himself. When hydration breaks were inserted into each half at the recent World Cup, IFAB, football's rulemakers, was not consulted. Nor was it given a say when a near-30-minute half-time show was inserted into the tournament's final.

Trump reportedly lobbied Infantino to rescind the suspension of a U.S. player, Folarin Balogun, who had been sent off during the World Cup. It duly happened. Then there was Infantino's 15-page social media rant accusing his critics of "spreading hate," posted just 36 hours before the investment plan became public knowledge.

"We cannot keep going on like this with secret schemes on fast-track timescales, cooked up by faceless individuals and of dubious benefit to the game," a UEFA statement read. "We must identify those responsible and hold them to account."

UEFA loses confidence

UEFA's response was unequivocal. On Saturday, following FIFA's U-turn, European football's governing body released a statement declaring it and "other members of the football family" had lost confidence in Infantino, accusing the FIFA president of a "shabby, back room, opaque" deal. UEFA also stated that "no option should be off the table" when it comes to reform.

Is football ready for a reset?

At the start of the summer, Infantino seemed untouchable. Now there is a mood of mutiny in the air. Infantino is up for re-election in March, with candidates needing to declare their intention to run by November 18.

Several names have been linked with a potential challenge. Nasser Al-Khelaifi, the Paris Saint-Germain president who sits on FIFA's council and chairs European Football Clubs (EFC), says he has "no ambition, no intention and no interest in the FIFA role." However, Victor Montagliani, the head of Concacaf, and Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa, the head of the Asian Football Confederation, have been linked more prominently. Lise Klaveness, the head of the Norwegian Football Federation, would struggle to win enough support but would represent an intriguing candidacy.

It will also be fascinating to see which moves UEFA president Aleksander Ceferin makes. His term also ends next year, and while he announced in 2024 that he would not run again, it remains unclear whether the biggest job in world football might tempt him.

Perhaps Infantino will take confidence from his predecessor, Sepp Blatter, who was called out by UEFA in 2011 following corruption allegations, only to remain in office for another five years. But the FIFA presidency arguably invites more scrutiny now than it did during even Blatter's controversial reign, due to Infantino's desire to "grow the game" in an increasingly polarised world.

The "division" that FIFA mentioned in its climbdown statement is not so much between its members but between the institution's leadership and everything that sits below it. If Infantino's credibility is shattered and nothing is done to bring about a proper change in priorities, then the governance of the sport is unlikely to recover.

As one analysis put it: this saga will be remembered for its hubris and for being the moment when the FIFA chief, who has consistently been allowed to challenge the boundaries of his authority, finally flew too close to the sun. The sport must never find itself in this position again.