Concacaf countries considering withdrawing support for under-fire Gianni Infantino

A number of Concacaf countries are considering following Europe’s lead by formally removing their ­support for the Fifa president, Gianni ­Infantino.

All 41 members of Concacaf – the confederation which represents North America, Central America and the Caribbean – are understood to have submitted ­letters of endorsement for ­Infantino’s re‑election campaign before the World Cup finals tournament, but many are now giving serious con­sideration to withdrawing them.

Finland became the first of Fifa’s 211 member associations to publicly withdraw its letter of support last Thursday, followed on Monday by the Football Association of Wales. The former Wales international Laura McAllister, a Uefa vice-president, had proposed the World Cup boycott at an emergency Uefa meeting last week, while the FA is also understood to have written to Fifa withholding its backing for Infantino.

Concacaf held an emergency meeting last Friday, with a source who attended telling the Guardian that all members are strongly aligned with Uefa, which has led the calls for Infantino to go.

The Concacaf meeting is understood to have featured pledges from several countries to withdraw their backing for Infantino, and some may have already done so in private.

One potential difficulty for Concacaf is the fact that four of its members – the US, Mexico, Costa Rica and Jamaica – are bidding to stage the 2031 Women’s World Cup in the next hosting decision to be taken by Fifa.

While there are no other bids on the table at present, the decision still has to be approved by Fifa at an extraordinary general meeting to be held in November.

The US Soccer Federation is understood to be deeply unhappy with Infantino – particularly with the ­backlash his dealings with ­Donald Trump created for them over the Folarin Balogun affair – but, given the political sensitivities, may not feel able to take him on.

Another complicating factor is the fact that the Concacaf president, Victor Montagliani, has been widely touted as the potential candidate most able to take Infantino on in the presidential election next March.

Although Montagliani has called for a thorough review of Fifa’s ­governance, the Canadian has yet to decide whether he wants to stand, and told the Guardian in an interview last month that his priority is being re‑elected as president of ­Concacaf, with those elections also taking place next year.

While Concacaf is united, the Asian Football Confederation, which also backed the Uefa-led opposition to Infantino’s proposed World Cup sell‑off, appears to have splintered since the dramatic events of last week. Significantly, the financial powerhouses of Qatar and the United Arab Emirates have both publicly backed Infantino to stay on, as have smaller countries such as Sri Lanka, Lebanon, Kuwait and Bhutan.

While most of the AFC’s 47 members – including Saudi Arabia – have stayed silent, Uefa is hoping it can attract their support, but it remains unclear whether the rebels have the numbers to force a genuine electoral contest.

New Zealand Football’s Andrew Pragnell says Fifa’s abandoned private equity proposal delivered a shock to confidence in world football’s governance, and he urged ­Oceania’s members to be united on the question of Infantino’s leadership.

Oceania’s confederation, which includes New Zealand among its 11 members, has yet to take a position on the Fifa president’s leadership, although Pragnall said there had been “enormous gains” for football associations outside the traditional powerhouses of Europe and ​South America under Infantino – “but the proposal itself, the way in which it was delivered, developed, the way members found out, and the shock to confidence among the international football system, has cast a pretty big shadow”.

Pragnell said that New Zealand would consult with Oceania members and other regional confederations before adopting a position, and said it would be preferable for the member nations to be aligned on the matter. “There’s obviously more power in numbers,” Pragnall said.

“Certainly it helps when a con^­federation acts in unison. You’ve seen in some confederations, even in the last week, members go dif­ferent ways from other members.”