Gianni Infantino is heading into a March re-election bid for a fourth term as FIFA president with the ground shifting beneath him — 136 member associations have officially rejected his plan to sell stakes in the World Cup, and the mechanisms to challenge his leadership are now in plain view.

Infantino called the investment proposal "not an obligation" on 29 July, according to Reuters, softening a plan that has drawn fierce opposition. But the backlash was already structural, not rhetorical. Those 136 rejections span confederations across the globe, though Africa, Conmebol (South America) and Oceania have not criticised the plan. Qatar has publicly backed Infantino, and Mexico has distanced itself from a joint Concacaf statement opposing it.

The World Cup stake sale is not the only fire burning. On 8 July, 70 European lawmakers called for an investigation into FIFA and Infantino over political neutrality, while European MPs separately demanded a probe into FIFA's unprecedented decision to overturn a red-card suspension for defender Leon Balogun, as reported by Al Jazeera. A week later, the International Olympic Committee received a formal complaint alleging Infantino breached rules through his role in that reversal, per Reuters. Investigations into Infantino's ties to Donald Trump's involvement in the World Cup were also reported as potentially advancing by mid-July.

La Liga president Javier Tebas has accused FIFA of "destroying the football industry" and called for Infantino to quit. A second FIFA official, chief operating officer Kevin Lamour, has also spoken out. The internal dissent is unusual for an organisation that has projected unity under Infantino's leadership.

For all the noise, the actual mechanics of removing a FIFA president are deliberately cumbersome. The BBC has outlined the pathway. A FIFA Council emergency meeting requires 19 of the 37 council members to call for one. The council comprises representatives from each confederation: Uefa (Europe) has nine seats, the AFC (Asia) seven, Concacaf (North and Central America plus the Caribbean) five, Africa six, Conmebol five, and Oceania three, rounded out by Infantino and secretary general Mattias Grafström. If 19 members trigger a meeting, it must happen within two weeks, and the council could ask Infantino to resign — though he can refuse.

The heavier lever is an extraordinary congress of all 211 member associations. That requires 43 associations, roughly one-fifth, to request one in writing. Uefa, with 55 member nations, can trigger it single-handedly. The congress would take at least two months, more likely three, to convene. A vote of no confidence there would need 106 votes to pass — a simple majority of the 211.

The arithmetic matters. Uefa's 55 votes plus Africa's 54 would reach 109, clearing the threshold. But Africa has not criticised the investment plan, and FIFA's voting blocs do not always break along continental lines. Asia holds 46 votes, Concacaf 35, Oceania 11, and Conmebol 10. Building a coalition of 106 without Africa or without significant Asian support looks difficult.

Infantino stood unopposed in both the 2019 and 2023 elections. His predecessor, Sepp Blatter, resigned in 2015 amid a corruption crisis that engulfed the organisation. The deadline to declare a candidacy for March's election is 18 November.

What makes this moment different from Infantino's previous re-elections is the breadth of opposition. The investment plan has given concrete shape to grievances that previously lacked a focal point. Whether that translates into a formal challenge before November — or whether Infantino navigates the discontent as he has before — is the question hovering over every council meeting and confederation gathering between now and then.