FIFA has defended its plan to bring private investors into the commercial side of world football, insisting that the game itself is not being put up for sale.

The proposal, backed by FIFA president Gianni Infantino, has triggered a growing backlash from football's governing bodies. UEFA has threatened to boycott future World Cups if the plan goes ahead, while Concacaf has also raised serious concerns about the process.

FIFA says the plan is aimed at raising more money for football development around the world. Its proposal would create a new commercial subsidiary, FIFA Forward Enterprise, which would bring together the organisation's commercial rights and the operation of its major events.

Private investors would be allowed to buy minority, non-controlling stakes in the new company. FIFA says it would keep control of football's governance, competitions, international calendar and sporting decisions.

"Nobody is selling football," FIFA said in a statement, adding that the proposal would not change the organisation's control of the sport.

FIFA has said the new structure could help increase funding for its 211 member associations. Under the proposal, member associations could receive significantly more development funding in future cycles, while an additional programme could provide up to $20 million for special projects. FIFA says the money would support areas such as infrastructure, coaching, national teams, grassroots football and the women's game.

But critics remain unconvinced.

UEFA has strongly rejected the idea of allowing private investors to have a stake in the commercial operations linked to FIFA's major competitions. The European governing body argues that the World Cup is a sporting institution built over generations and should not be treated as an investment opportunity.

The dispute has put Infantino's plan under intense pressure. UEFA and Concacaf members together account for 96 of FIFA's 211 member associations, meaning the proposal would need support from associations outside those two confederations to secure the required majority.

Concacaf, which represents 41 member associations in North and Central America and the Caribbean, has also questioned the consultation process and the short deadline given to associations to consider the proposal.

The Asian Football Confederation has expressed similar concerns, saying it was not properly consulted before the plan was made public and calling for greater clarity on its financial and legal implications.

The reaction from Africa and Oceania is being closely watched. The Confederation of African Football and the Oceania Football Confederation are expected to discuss the proposal in August, while South America's governing body, Conmebol, has not publicly stated its position.

FIFA, however, says the plan is designed to strengthen football rather than weaken its independence.

The organisation says investors would hold only minority stakes and would have no role in running the sport. FIFA would retain control of the new subsidiary and decide how football is governed.

The debate comes after FIFA reported strong financial results from the 2026 World Cup cycle. Infantino has argued that the success of the tournament has created new opportunities to generate more income and increase investment in football worldwide.

The question now is whether FIFA can persuade enough member associations that the plan will benefit the game without compromising its independence.

For UEFA and other critics, the issue is much bigger than money. It is about who should control the future of the world's most popular sport.

The final decision will rest with FIFA's member associations. Until then, the battle over the future of football's commercial model is likely to continue.