When Gianni Infantino and FIFA announced the possibility of selling an asset in the competition, the document revealed that it never mentioned women's football. With two under-20 World Cups months away from starting and the Women's World Cup the next year, it was seen as a massive oversight and disservice to women's sport, and it reflected poorly on how the organisation viewed the importance of women's sport.
FIFA now faces more legal challenges over how it has governed the women's game, with fresh allegations from European Leagues accusing it of using its regulatory power in ways that threaten the growth and sustainability of the women's game.
European Leagues, which represents 53 professional divisions and 1,328 clubs across 34 countries, has extended an existing complaint to the European Commission to include FIFA’s handling of the women’s international match calendar and other regulatory decisions affecting women’s football.
This includes major leagues like the WSL, Liga F, Serie A Femminile, Première League, and Frauen-Bundesliga.
Ultimately,e the dispute is whether FIFA can do the jobs of both football regulator and organiser of major competitions without creating a conflict of interest.
This is not new: FIFPRO, the European league, and the players' union complained to the European Commission about FIFA's decision-making on the men's international calendar.
They argued that FIFA had abused a dominant position under European competition law by failing to properly involve national leagues and player representatives in decisions over the international calendar.
The complaint came amid growing concerns about fixture congestion and FIFA's expansion of its competitions, including changes to the World Cup and Club World Cup.
That original case has not appeared to make significant progress through the European Union's bureaucratic process. But adding women's football adds a new dimension to the dispute.
The same issues that the men's side has continued to protest have been argued to exist in the women's game. The complaint is that FIFA's approach risks damaging domestic leagues while placing additional pressure on players.
“FIFA's conduct threatens the growth and financial sustainability of women's professional leagues, and risks player health and wellbeing,” European Leagues said.
They argue that FIFA is in a conflicting position as both a governing authority and a commercial competition organiser, so basically between being the governing body supposed to protect and serve and honour football and getting rich.
It contends that FIFA's decisions can therefore prioritise its own competitions and commercial interests over the interests of domestic leagues that provide the week-to-week structure of professional women's football.
FIFA approved its women's international match calendar for 2026-29 in May 2024.
According to FIFA, the calendar was developed following research and consultation with stakeholders, including European and global leagues, with player welfare considered as part of the process.
FIFA also points to changes designed to reduce the burden on players and clubs. FIFA cut the number of international windows from six to five, arguing that this would reduce travel and disruption to domestic competitions.
That is the central disagreement.
European Leagues believe FIFA's regulatory decisions still threaten domestic women's football, while FIFA maintains that it developed its calendar through consultation and with player welfare in mind.
The legal process will now determine how European law assesses those competing claims.
The 'players' union, FIFPRO, while part of the original complaint, has withdrawn its action after a cooperation agreement with FIFA that included an offer to negotiate over the international calendar and reforms to the global transfer system. This leaves the European leagues to pursue the case further, highlighting a clear split between the interests of th leagues and players, who are both concerned about the international calendar but no longer share the same approach.
FIFA believes in dialogue rather than “legal action and escalation” and stressed that its doors remain open to agreements that it believes are in football's best interests.
FIFA also said it had not been officially notified of the complaint extension and therefore could not comment on it in detail.
Its broader defence is that it did not impose the women's calendar without consultation. FIFA says research, analysis and discussions with key stakeholders backed the four-year schedule.
It also argues that it remains committed to investment in women's football, new competitions, prize money and development programmes.
The women's complaint cannot be viewed entirely in isolation.
Across European football, an increasingly visible battle is underway over the balance of power between FIFA, UEFA, domestic leagues, clubs and players.
At its heart is a question of authority.
FIFA controls the international calendar and operates some of the sport's biggest competitions. Domestic leagues, meanwhile, depend on having enough space in the calendar to stage their own competitions and develop sustainable club structures.
For women's football, the issue is particularly significant because domestic leagues are still developing commercially and financially.
European Leagues argues that decisions made at the international level can disproportionately affect competitions trying to establish themselves and attract investment.
Women's football has expanded rapidly in recent years, with larger audiences, greater commercial investment and increasing professionalisation.
But that growth has also created new pressures.
More international competitions, more club matches and an increasingly crowded calendar can create opportunities for revenue and exposure while simultaneously placing greater demands on players and clubs.
That makes fixture scheduling particularly important.
European Leagues' argument is not simply that FIFA should organise fewer competitions. It is that the people running domestic leagues and representing players should have a meaningful role in deciding how the overall calendar is constructed.
FIFA responds that it has already consulted and that it designed its calendar with player welfare and domestic disruption in mind.
The European Commission has been contacted for comment, but the immediate outcome of the expanded complaint remains unclear.
The case may ultimately stretch beyond the legal question.
Women's football is becoming too commercially important to be treated as an afterthought in debates about football's governance. Domestic leagues are building their own audiences, clubs are investing more heavily, and players are becoming increasingly influential voices in the sport.
European Leagues' complaint therefore challenges more than one calendar.
It challenges the idea that FIFA should be able to decide the direction of the women's game without the domestic competitions and players most affected by those decisions having a decisive voice.
FIFA says it wants dialogue. European leagues have chosen escalation.
The next stage of the dispute will show whether those two approaches can ultimately be reconciled or whether the battle over control of women's football is only beginning.
Add comment
Comments