Grenada and St. Kitts and Nevis have every right to support FIFA President Gianni Infantino.
They are independent football associations. They may form their own views, cast their own votes, and publicly defend the leader they believe best serves world football.
But that right does not remove their responsibility to explain themselves – especially when their public support comes amid a major controversy over FIFA’s governance, financial transparency, and the handling of the World Cup’s commercial future.
The Grenada Football Association and the St. Kitts and Nevis Football Association recently reaffirmed support for Infantino after FIFA withdrew the proposed FIFA Football Fund Enterprise initiative.
The proposal had triggered criticism from major football bodies over concerns about transparency, consultation, and the potential commercialisation of World Cup-related assets.
The issue is not that Grenada or St. Kitts must follow a regional line without question. Caribbean unity should never mean blind conformity. The concern is that their statements appeared to place loyalty to Infantino above the legitimate questions raised by associations and confederations representing a large share of the football world.
UEFA, CONCACAF, and the Asian Football Confederation publicly criticized FIFA leadership and called for accountability. Their joint intervention was significant because it came from three of FIFA’s six confederations, not from a handful of disgruntled officials.
The Caribbean Football Union, U.S. Soccer, Canada Soccer, and the Central American Football Union also supported calls for meaningful change, transparency, and stronger governance.
That is the context in which Grenada’s statement must be read. The GFA welcomed Infantino’s decision to withdraw the proposal, praised his leadership, and pointed to FIFA’s financial and technical assistance for Grenadian football, including support for grassroots, girls’, and women’s programs.
St. Kitts and Nevis issued a similarly supportive response, also emphasising the assistance provided under Infantino’s leadership.
Let me be clear: There is absolutely nothing wrong with acknowledging FIFA support. The fact is that small football nations need resources. Funding can improve facilities, buy equipment, train coaches, support youth programs, and give girls and young women more opportunities to play.
Grenada should actively pursue every legitimate avenue to develop its football. But there is an obvious governance concern when an association defends a powerful leader while highlighting the funding it receives from the organisation he controls.
I am not, and no one should accuse Grenada or St. Kitts and Nevis of any misconduct without evidence. Public reporting does not establish that either association acted illegally, received an improper benefit, or was directed by FIFA to issue its statement. They are entitled to their views.
Still, the optics and appearance of dependency matter. When development funding and political support become intertwined, people reasonably ask whether smaller associations can criticise FIFA freely and not face repercussions.
Even without an explicit threat or bargain, an organisation that depends heavily on resources controlled by a global body may have a strong incentive to avoid confrontation. This is simply a fact of life – he who pays the piper calls the tune.
So, that is why transparency is essential. Not making a mountain out of a proverbial molehill, but the GFA should explain whether its executive committee formally approved the statement, whether it independently examined the FIFA Football Fund Enterprise proposal, and whether it consulted Grenadian football stakeholders before publicly backing Infantino.
It should also clarify what FIFA funding and technical support Grenada has received, under which programs, and whether such support follows published criteria available to all eligible associations.
And those are not hostile questions. On the contrary, they are ordinary questions of accountability. Grenada’s statement also invoked unity and respect for FIFA’s established institutional processes.
Those principles are important. Football organisations need rules, orderly procedures, and mutual respect. But unity cannot and should not mean silence.
Calling for an independent review of a major World Cup commercial proposal is not an attempt to undermine FIFA. It is a demand that FIFA live up to the principles it claims to represent. A healthy institution does not fear scrutiny. It welcomes it.
The joint criticism from UEFA, CONCACAF, and AFC did not argue that FIFA should be destroyed or ignored. It argued that member associations deserve information, consultation, and accountability when major decisions are being made. No, that is not sabotage but how a federation is supposed to work.
For the Caribbean, this question carries particular weight. Small associations have limited influence when acting alone. Their strength comes from collective organisation, shared positions, and the ability to negotiate as a region.
When Caribbean associations publicly split during a major governance dispute, they risk weakening the region’s influence within CONCACAF and FIFA.
Grenada may have a principled reason for supporting Infantino. If so, it should say so clearly – not merely praise his withdrawal of a controversial proposal or cite the financial help received during his tenure. A stronger statement would have been simple: “Grenada welcomes FIFA’s support for football development and the withdrawal of the proposal. We also support a transparent, independent review of any initiative involving World Cup commercial rights and insist that all member associations be properly consulted.”
Football belongs to players, coaches, parents, clubs, volunteers, and supporters. It does not belong to any president, executive circle, or funding network.
Grenada’s football leaders have a duty to ensure that the country’s voice is never traded for access, favours, or political convenience. So, in a nutshell, the real question is not if Grenada should support or not support Gianni Infantino. It is whether Grenada can support football development while still speaking independently when FIFA’s most powerful leaders need to be held accountable.
Michael Roberts is a Grenadian journalist living and working in New York City. He is a veteran communications and political strategist with over 35 years of experience