While Uefa members are among the richest on the planet, many other nations rely on Fifa funding for basic infrastructure.

While the AFC opposes Infantino’s plan, unlike Uefa it has not threatened to boycott Fifa competitions. AFC members would not be obliged to vote against the proposals.

Rogers Byamukama, of the Ugandan Football Federation, argued any avenue that could lead to more resources for nations like his should be explored.

“First and foremost, you need to understand that football is a very expensive venture, especially on the African continent where the resources are not easy to come by,” he told Newsday on BBC World Service.

“For instance in Uganda, the number of infrastructure projects that have been funded by Fifa from the resources generated by Fifa, especially at the World Cup, both from ticket sales as well as sponsors.

“On top of that, there are many grassroots programmes that have been funded by Fifa, including schools for football.

“From my perspective, any avenue that brings in more resources is good because those resources would be distributed and given to federations, especially on the African continent and that would inspire growth.”

Advertisement

Byamukama acknowledged Uefa’s right to speak out, but suggested its members were not reliant on Fifa funding like many associations in the rest of the world where Infantino remains popular.

In the first two cycles of the Fifa Forward development programme, through to 2022, $2.8bn (£2.08bn) was made available for investment across the 211 member associations.

Fifa Forward 3.0 – covering the years 2023 through to 2026 – has produced a 30% increase in funding.

Fifa has provided a further $5m (£3.7m) for every member association, with another $60m (£44.48m) paid to each confederation for their own projects.

After expanding the men’s World Cup to 48 teams from 32 for the 2026 edition, Fifa is seeking an independent agency to assess an expansion to 64 teams for the 2030 tournament.

The timeline on documents seen by BBC Sport said Fifa would receive agency proposals by 7 August, with a Fifa decision on 14 August. Delivery of analysis by the agency is then scheduled for 11 September.

While Uefa members are among the richest on the planet, many other nations rely on Fifa funding for basic infrastructure.

While the AFC opposes Infantino’s plan, unlike Uefa it has not threatened to boycott Fifa competitions. AFC members would not be obligated to vote against the proposals.

Rogers Byamukama, of the Ugandan Football Federation, argued any avenue that could lead to more resources for nations like his should be explored.

“First and foremost, you need to understand that football is a very expensive venture, especially on the African continent where the resources are not easy to come by,” he told Newsday on BBC World Service.

“For instance in Uganda, the number of infrastructure projects that have been funded by Fifa from the resources generated by Fifa, especially at the World Cup, both from ticket sales as well as sponsors.

“On top of that, there are many grassroots programmes that have been funded by Fifa, including schools for football.

“From my perspective, any avenue that brings in more resources is good because those resources would be distributed and given to federations, especially on the African continent and that would inspire growth.”

Advertisement

Byamukama acknowledged Uefa’s right to speak out, but suggested its members were not reliant on Fifa funding like many associations in the rest of the world where Infantino remains popular.

In the first two cycles of the Fifa Forward development programme, through to 2022, $2.8bn (£2.08bn) was made available for investment across the 211 member associations.

Fifa Forward 3.0 – covering the years 2023 through to 2026 – has produced a 30% increase in funding.

Fifa has provided a further $5m (£3.7m) for every member association, with another $60m (£44.48m) paid to each confederation for their own projects.

Given Keith herself was a tad surprised she scooped up a medal here, her grandad’s take on the event ought to be a good one.

The 10,000m is her preference, but the longer distance final did not go to plan on Monday and she finished seventh.

The Inverness athlete said she was faced with the ‘can Megan win a medal?’ talk earlier this week, but with that weight of expectation lifted – combined with experience of the home crowd and “the help of two other Scots in the race” – she was freed from the shackles to soar to a classy and courageous run.

“If you look at Monday on paper, that was pretty disappointing,” the 24-year-old added.

“I don’t think you’d put me in the running for a 5km medal since the 10km is normally closer to being my strength, so that definitely helped, the removal of that pressure.

“I think I knew if I felt horrendous and dropped out or fell off the pace again it wouldn’t really matter so I may as well shoot my shot.”

And shoot she did. Biding her time in the middle of the congested pact, Keith made her move with four laps to go, weaving past early pacesetters from Kenya and Uganda.

Advertisement

She was afforded a bit of breathing space with two hurls around the track to go. But as expected, the exceptional Australian duo of Rose Davies – who made it a double gold at these Games with her 10km – and Jessica Hull, the 1500m Olympic silver medallist, entered another gear in the final lap.

While the cameras focused on the tremendous tussle between the pair in the matching yellow vests, the majority of the crowd had their eyes a wee bit further back, bawling at Keith on the final stretch.

She was home safe and sound. And swiftly searching for a saltire.

Once that was draped over her shoulders, and she’d caught up with fellow Scots Eloise Walker and Laura Muir, who finished 15th and 16th respectively, she was darting back around the track – the wrong way, this time – in search of her grandad.

He was eventually found for a quick hug, but a bigger debrief – and the declaration, surely, that this topped any other Scotstoun occasion – is still to be had.