Senior figures within European football are working out whether there are legal options to oppose Gianni Infantinos plan to to set up a private company to run Fifas competitions, while some executives have privately spoken of their countries being ready to boycott the World Cup. They are among the more furious reactions to Fifas announcements on Tuesday, but others were reminded of another aspect of this long story. Back when Infantino first started to really ingratiate himself with the US president, advisors within American politics were warning about how integrating yourself with Donald Trump normally goes one way. Theres eventually a will for the wider family to be involved. In any event, we now have a situation where this Fifa are willing to sell off parts of the most precious prize in football the global good that is the World Cup - to the Trump empire. Josh Kushner, the brother of Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, is in discussions to be a lead investor in Infantinos absurd new plan. Sepp Blatter was willing to go further in his description of all this.It should be stressed that it is wrong to be too revisionist about the disgraced former Fifa president given that this world wouldnt be possible without him, but his experience has inevitably given him an eye for the intricacies of the games politics.The close relationship between the Fifa president and the US president has reached a financial dimension that is deeply damaging football, Blatter posted.Thats a huge part of this dismal story summed up but far from all of it.It is nevertheless instructive that the Kushner element was said to be infuriating many stakeholders more than the money.Where else was Infantinos relationship with Trump going? Does this not tie in with all the claims that Infantino now sees himself as some kind of tech mogul-style founder, as much as the Pope of football?Some believe that the six weeks of the World Cup saw him descend too deep into the bubble, to the point we get this, and a point that could bring a bursting moment.Because, if so much of this has evolved out of Infantinos shameless obsequiousness with Trump, it has also raised multiple other tensions right up to the future of Fifas not-for-profit status under Swiss law when they are essentially converting their primary asset to a private business entity.Infantino would be set for a potentially lucrative commissioner role in the new Fifa enterprise (Getty)For now, most remain infuriated by the sheer brazenness of Infantino using his position to sell off the World Cup like this.It was this base emotion that prompted Andy Burnham to comment on it.Politicos have pointed out that it sets up the new UK prime ministers first indirect clash with the Trumps, but its a point of principle for an authentic football fan like Burnham, and one that will gather popular support.Its also the first time since the Super League that the game has seen such a direct major government intervention, which points to the story's scale.Burnhams input may only increase pressure on the Football Association and other federations.The immediate response from such bodies, like with so many involving Infantino of late, was silence. But on Wednesday morning, the FA expressed deep concern over the plans. When the proposal is shared in the full and transparent way now promised by Fifa, we will make our views clear, and comment further, a spokesperson added. All of this has been viewed as especially pertinent for the FA since they have been cast as one of the few European federations edging close to Infantino due to the will to host the 2035 Womens World Cup and a mens tournament in 2038 or 2042. Same old, same old. Despite that, none of them right up to the FAs Fifa vice-president Debbie Hewitt knew about any of this until the media reports. The FAs statement confirmed that they were blindsided and completely unaware of the proposals until Tuesday night.Now, there is a pressure on virtually all of them to speak up, another tension: The federations are supposed to represent the interests of their football communities above all else.And the bottom line is now this: there is not a single football fan that wants the World Cup to be privatised, let alone in circumstances such as these. It demands public comment from the national associations as to whether they are in favour or not.Josh Kushner, the brother of Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner, has been in talks about becoming lead investor (Reuters)This points to a core truth of this story.The major European football countries of England, Spain, Germany and France could kill this at a stroke, by simply flexing their muscle.Will they have the nerve, or the courage?Theres of course an irony in how these are the same countries who offer one misused justification for Fifas plans, in how they attract most of the games wealth.For all of Infantinos appeals to redistribution, though, its easy to see how this will evolve in the long term.There was a lack of criticism from national associations over issues such as ticket prices and Fifas at the World Cup (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)There will actually be less money, not more, for the wider game since there will be a financial incentive to maximise the most commercially appealing elements. In other words, the major clubs and the interests of bodies like the European Football Clubs (EFC).Why would anything else happen if it is now just a business?EFC, headed by Qatars Nasser Al Khelaifi, also occupy an intriguing place in this given that they are trying to run competitions with both Uefa and Fifa.One partnership is admittedly much deeper than the other. Uefa to give them their due have led the way with another strong statement, but many see an irony and political opportunism there since they arguably started this path. They restructured control of the Champions League so it's now partly run with the big clubs through the EFC via a commercial enterprise.Figures within both bodies were nevertheless adamant that the leaderships were already exploring ways both legal and political to front up and challenge Infantino.By the same token, Fifa gave clubs $355m for the participation of players at the 2026 World Cup. Are the EFC really going to accept such a comparatively small percentage of competition revenues, if the World Cup is part privatised?Lawyer Antoine Duval meanwhile pointed to how Fifas commercial practices are currently tolerated under EU competition law because they contribute to fulfilling public interests. That drastically changes with such a private dimension, where a considerable aim is increasing value for shareholders.And, in such a scenario, how sustainable is Fifas not-for-profit status under Swiss law?Even from a purely business perspective, though, there is a huge pertinent question.What rational or financial argument can there be for Fifa selling off ownership of the most valuable products on the planet, something that they themselves would insist is only going to increase in value?Uefa president Alexander Ceferin and Nasser Al Khelaifi, of Qatar, PSG and the EFC, are both major figures in how the opposition or support to Fifa could form (PA)Its not like theyre Barcelona or Real Madrid looking to meet Financial Fair Play restrictions, under a mountain of debt, and against huge competition, where selling off your identity and your future was objectionable as it was.Its why this is so much worse.Fifa dont need to raise this money. They dont need to trade off parts of the future.Other forces are keenly watching, from capitalist interests to autocratic states, especially as they seek to wrest control of the game from western Europe.It is one of many reasons Uefa are now at the centre of this, as one of many tensions at play.Except, one of the moments when Infantino feels most tension himself is when fans boo him; when there are banners, when there are protests.It bursts the bubble hes in, even if its brief.But now he wont really experience that until perhaps the 2030 World Cup and who knows what the complexion of the competition will be like by then.