Gianni Infantino’s grip on the Fifa presidency “could have been lost” during the 2026 World Cup had the United States eliminated Belgium after a controversial disciplinary U‐turn involving US striker Folarin Balogun, according to La Liga chief Javier Tebas.
The president of Spain’s top-flight league says Infantino was already facing intense pressure over alleged political interference involving former US president Donald Trump – and believes the Fifa leader’s time in office is now “effectively over”.
Trump intervention and Balogun ban reversal
The row centres on Balogun’s availability for the USA’s last‐16 tie against Belgium at the 2026 World Cup.
Fifa’s disciplinary committee had imposed a 12‐month suspension on the forward following a red card in the round‐of‐32 match against Bosnia and Herzegovina. But the suspension was subsequently put on hold, allowing Balogun to play against Belgium.
Tebas says that decision – and Trump’s reported involvement – left Infantino exposed at the very top of world football.
The La Liga president told Italian newspaper La Gazzetta dello Sport: “The suspension of the American player was a very serious matter. They were lucky that Belgium knocked out the United States, because if the opposite had happened there would have been a case that could perhaps have cost Infantino his position.”
Trump is said to have intervened directly by calling Infantino before the disciplinary body reversed course, freeing Balogun to be selected by USA coach Mauricio Pochettino for the knockout match.
Despite the controversy over his inclusion, Balogun and the US were comprehensively beaten 4-1 by Belgium, ending American hopes of progressing further at their home World Cup.
IOC complaint over ‘political neutrality’
The handling of the case triggered wider concern within the Olympic movement.
Infantino, who has been a member of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) for six years, was the subject of a formal complaint to the IOC accusing him of breaching the organisation’s principle of political neutrality through his dealings with Trump.
However, no sanctions will be imposed on the Fifa president as a result of that complaint.
Even so, Tebas argues that the incident has deepened doubts about Infantino’s leadership and future at the helm of world football’s governing body.
“In my opinion yes, I think his time is up,” Tebas said. “There is no opposing candidate, because nobody wants to stand just to lose. He should not continue, but the current situation means that he will not leave.”
Tebas attacks plan to expand 2030 World Cup
Tebas also used the interview to strongly criticise Fifa’s proposal to further expand the World Cup to 64 teams for the 2030 edition – a plan Infantino and Fifa vice‐president Alejandro Dominguez have indicated they are willing to study.
“Expanding the number of teams makes no sense,” Tebas said. “The football industry is not limited to the World Cup; it is fundamentally based on domestic competitions that keep the game going. They are destroying an industry that provides tens of thousands of jobs for the sake of a tournament that lasts only 40 days and involves a limited number of players.”
He added: “The best players are at the World Cup, but they also play in our leagues. We need fewer international matches and more protection for domestic football at all levels. Unfortunately, they do not realise they are making irresponsible decisions.”
More games, more groups, more strain
Under the 64‐team concept, the World Cup would feature 16 groups of four, with progression limited to the top two sides in each section and the round of 32 retained. Third‐placed teams would no longer advance.
The expanded format would dramatically increase the burden on players and calendars that clubs and leagues already describe as overstretched.
The 2026 World Cup – co‐hosted by the United States, Canada and Mexico – set a record with 104 matches. If Fifa approves the move to 64 teams in 2030, that number would rise to 128 games, further intensifying the long‐running battle between the global governing body and domestic leagues over control of the football calendar and the future shape of the sport.
