Indian football enters 2026 facing one of the most serious institutional crises in its modern history.
What began as a commercial deadlock has now escalated into a governance emergency that threatens not only the 2025–26 Indian Super League (ISL) season, but also India’s presence in Asian club competitions. At the heart of the turmoil lies the collapse of the Master Rights Agreement (MRA) between the All India Football Federation (AIFF) and Football Sports Development Limited (FSDL), a breakdown that has left the country’s top-tier league without a clear owner, operator, broadcaster, or calendar .
The MRA, which expired on December 8, 2025, had governed the ISL since its inception, placing commercial and operational control in FSDL’s hands while the AIFF functioned largely as a rights-holder. Negotiations for renewal failed amid disagreements over revenue sharing and long-term control. With neither side willing to compromise, the league was effectively put on hold months before the deadline, and by December, the governance vacuum became official.
A League Without a Season
The immediate consequence has been the indefinite delay of the 2025–26 ISL season, now tentatively pushed to February 2026. With no broadcaster and no central revenue pool, the AIFF attempted to float an independent tender for the league’s commercial rights. The market response was telling: not a single bidder came forward. This failure underlined a harsh reality without a strong commercial partner, the ISL in its current form is not viewed as financially viable.
Read Articles Without Ads On Your IndiaSportsHub App. Download Now And Stay Updated
In response, the AIFF has proposed an “own and operate” model, where the federation would directly run the league for the next 20 years. While structurally closer to European league systems, the proposal lacks one critical component: guaranteed revenue. Clubs are being asked to fund a truncated season themselves, contributing roughly ₹2.5 crore each, with no clarity on broadcast income or sponsorship returns. Unsurprisingly, resistance has been strong.
While the domestic uncertainty is damaging enough, the larger threat lies at the continental level. The Asian Football Confederation (AFC) mandates that clubs must play a minimum of 24 domestic matches in a season combining league and cup fixtures to be eligible for competitions such as the AFC Champions League Two. With the ISL delayed and likely to be compressed into a single-leg or conference-based format, this requirement is almost impossible to meet.
Even with participation in the Durand Cup and Super Cup, most clubs would fall short of the 24-match threshold. This places India’s AFC slots in direct jeopardy. The consequences are severe: non-compliance does not result in a fine or warning, but outright disqualification and reallocation of slots to other Asian nations.
No club illustrates this crisis better than FC Goa. On the pitch, Goa did everything required, winning the 2025 AIFF Super Cup and earning qualification for the 2026–27 AFC Champions League Two. Off the pitch, however, they remain hostage to a system that may not allow them to fulfil licensing criteria.
Read Articles Without Ads On Your IndiaSportsHub App. Download Now And Stay Updated
Despite competing in domestic cups and continental fixtures, FC Goa’s total domestic match count remains far below the AFC’s minimum. The irony is stark: a club that qualified through sporting excellence could be denied Asia due to administrative paralysis beyond its control. Player unrest has already surfaced, with FC Goa footballers staging a brief on-field protest during an ACL Two fixture to highlight the uncertainty surrounding Indian football’s future.
To salvage the season, the AIFF has floated two emergency formats: a conference-based league or a single-leg round-robin. Both significantly reduce match volume and fail to address AFC compliance. Centralised venues, another AIFF proposal, have further angered clubs, who argue that long hotel stays without matchday revenue are financially unsustainable.
Read Articles Without Ads On Your IndiaSportsHub App. Download Now And Stay Updated
More worryingly, some franchises have openly questioned whether participation is worth the cost. Odisha FC, among others, has indicated it may withdraw altogether if forced to bankroll a season without long-term commercial assurance. The cracks among ISL stakeholders are now visible and widening.
Betting on an AFC Waiver
With compliance mathematically unachievable, the AIFF’s only realistic hope lies in securing a one-time exemption from the AFC, citing exceptional circumstances. While precedents exist notably during the COVID-19 pandemic this crisis is administrative rather than external. The AFC has, in recent years, tightened governance norms across Asia, making any waiver far from guaranteed. If the exemption is denied, India risks losing its continental representation for an entire cycle, a setback that would undo years of progress made by clubs and players alike.
The ISL crisis is no longer about one season. It is a stress test of Indian football’s governance model. The FSDL-backed era masked structural weaknesses through heavy subsidies and centralised control. The current chaos has exposed how fragile the ecosystem remains without commercial certainty, transparent planning, and regulatory alignment.
The months ahead will define whether Indian football stabilises through reform or slides further into uncertainty. For now, the ball is no longer at the feet of the players, but firmly in the corridors of administration where the margin for error has all but disappeared.
