The five men should have been in a celebratory mood. FIFA had just pulled off a World Cup that broke records on a number of fronts. Its spectacular culmination, the final, was a day away from kickoff.
But their mood was anything but jubilant. The men, a group of top directors known as the FIFA bureau of the management board, had been summoned to a hastily organized meeting at the Waldorf Astoria hotel in Manhattan, according to three people familiar with the discussions speaking on condition of anonymity because the talks were private. The directors had until midnight to sign off on a plan that threatened to change soccer forever and would almost certainly lead to a major schism among the sport’s leaders.
The project purported to sell a 20 percent stake in FIFA to a group of investors led by Joshua Kushner, the brother of President Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner. Such a move would put into private hands a portion of the World Cup, an event that has been run and controlled by FIFA, a nonprofit in Zurich, for 96 years.
The plans, drawn up over months amid great secrecy in conjunction with Joshua Kushner’s fund Thrive Eternal and JPMorgan Chase, had been kept secret from all but fewer than a handful of soccer executives. The bureau’s role was to review significant financial transactions, but most of the five members had not heard about the plan, the three people said. They left the Waldorf Astoria with the impression that FIFA President Gianni Infantino, who wasn’t present, would be furious if they stalled, the three people said.
Stunned, some of the bureau’s members talked privately about their misgivings and the repercussions of saying no to a boss like Mr. Infantino, who wielded great power over their careers, according to one of the people.
Three members signed off on the agreement before the deadline, and two did not, the three people said. In favor were Secretary General Mattias Grafstrom, legal head Emilio Garcia and chief of staff Dan O’Toole; chief operating officer Kevin Lamour and finance head Thomas Peyer declined to back it.
With a majority vote, Mr. Infantino pressed ahead. The Times of London and the Financial Times reported Mr. Infantino’s plan on July 28, triggering a wave of outrage around the world. Condemnation came from all corners of global soccer, with many high-powered figures declaring they had not been consulted. Several of Mr. Infantino’s top deputies have since come forward to say they, too, had been blindsided.
FIFA declined to comment. The bureau’s meeting on the Saturday before the World Cup final, and the pressure that was placed on its members to sign off on the project, have not been previously reported.
How it played out underscores the fact that Mr. Infantino had kept the idea from all but a tight inner circle, excluding many important figures inside FIFA, even as he developed the plan with Thrive Capital and JP Morgan. Of the five bureau members, only Mr. O’Toole, a young staff member handpicked by Mr. Infantino to work with the bankers on the plan, had any meaningful role on the project, the three people said. He had been working on it for months.
The bureau’s approval was the first step in getting the plan over the line. FIFA’s most important decisions typically go through a much larger group called the FIFA Council, which is made up of soccer leaders from around the world. They are not FIFA employees, but officials from member federations. Mr. Infantino, however, wanted to find a way to get the deal without that requirement, the three people said.
European soccer’s governing body UEFA, a group made up of the continent’s 55 soccer-playing nations, led the opposition that followed, threatening a boycott of all its teams from all FIFA events, including the World Cup. Similar regional bodies for Asia, North America and the Caribbean publicly offered their own criticism of the secretive process behind the plan and FIFA’s rushed demands for them to sign off on it. Politicians, including the British prime minister, Andy Burnham, joined significant figures in the soccer world to denounce the plans.
Even though he had voted in favor, Mr. Grafstrom, who as FIFA’s secretary general is the organization’s top administrative official, described what had happened as “a sad and reproachable series of events” and attempted to draw a line separating the staff from Mr. Infantino.
On July 31, Mr. Infantino abandoned the plan. On Wednesday, FIFA issued a joint communiqué to their members, signed by both Mr. Infantino and Mr. Grafstrom, apologizing for what had happened and promising to learn from it. That same day, Mr. Infantino held crisis talks with his senior staff in Morocco. The meeting started with two senior staffers calling for a show of support for their beleaguered boss, according to two of the people.
Mr. Infantino has shored up public support from several influential soccer federations, like those from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates, and many of the smaller ones that rely on millions of dollars from FIFA for their operations.
What Mr. Infantino said to persuade Mr. Grafstrom and other FIFA leaders to back him remains unclear. He has posted a picture of himself and Mr. Grafstrom grinning with their thumbs up on Instagram.
Despite those efforts, the crisis is not over. In a statement on Thursday, UEFA, the European soccer body, continued to threaten a boycott unless Mr. Infantino resigned.
