IT all happened so quickly. Less than six months ago, Gianni Infantino was the secretary-general of Uefa, the nuts-and-bolts administrator in the shadow of Michel Platini, the man destined to be the next Fifa president.

Now, Platini is banned for six years, pending his appeal at the Court of Arbitration for Sport. And Infantino, after defeating Bahrain’s Sheikh Salman and two other candidates on Friday, is the new Fifa boss.

What’s remarkable about post- Blatter Fifa is that while football may be a global lingua franca, different parts of the world see the governing body very differently.

Some in the Anglo-world – Britain certainly, but also North America and Australia – view Fifa as irredeem- ably broken and Uefa as not much better. To them they are organisations drenched in corruption, with some faceless and profligate foreign bureaucrat replaced by another. To them, Brexit ought to mean ditching Fifa and Uefa and perhaps cocooning themselves in the familiarity of the Premier League.

In South America, the clash was between Europe and Asia, old money versus nouveau riche. Infantino’s victory is a win – perhaps the final one – for Europe, before the sheer financial might of Asia, fuelled by Gulf oil and gas and Chinese state- enabled billionaires, irrevocably swings the pendulum East.

The Caribbean, Oceania and most of Africa – Blatter loyalists for the past few decades – faced the Salman v Infantino choice with trepidation. Blatter the benefactor is gone, so do you submit to the European and echo centuries of colonialism, or do you roll the dice on the blue-blooded Gulf Arab? And, either way, what does it say about you when you still rely on handouts?

Those parts of Asia not in Salman’s sphere of influence had a still different view. Sure, electing the first Asian president would have made quite a statement. Yet at the same time would it have made the Gulf, already awash with cash, omni- potent, perhaps at the expense of the former Soviet republics or the Far Eastern blue bloods or the Southeast Asian tigers or, indeed, Australia in this, the most diverse of continents?

Everybody has their own narrative lens. And, in some ways, it is a fitting parallel for the disparate members of the organisation, their priorities and their world view.

Finding that common thread will be Infantino’s second-biggest challenge, after ridding Fifa of a toxic culture which led to, at best, self- interest voting blocs and stasis and, at worst, corruption and thievery.

He clearly sees the two things going hand in hand. Burnishing the tarnished image of Fifa – and its off-shoots in the confederations – is clearly a priority, but it’s also part of a process. A cleaner, better, more trustworthy Fifa will bring more sponsorship, commercial income and TV revenue. That, in turn, will provide more funds to devolve to the individual FAs, more than half of whom survive on annual budgets of less than £1.2 million a year. And he’s going to use the reform package, which gives Fifa the tools to fight entrenched corruption and which he helped design, to make it happen, along with the commercial expertise he developed in his seven years as deputy head of Uefa.

“It’s not Fifa’s money, it’s your money!” he shouted at the delegates, perhaps hoping they wouldn’t take him too literally.

That’s his pitch, and if your litmus test was the combination of a rational plan and belief that he has the nous to deliver it, well, then it’s not a surprise he won. By those standards, he was the most viable candidate.

He will be in power until 2019 and he will be judged on that time. He knows that there are some he can’t win over: those who rejected the reform package because it snoops too far into the affairs of individual federations (by doing things like auditing just how the development grants are spent) and those who think abolishing Fifa is the only solution.

So he will go to work on the rest instead.

“I want us to do such a good job that people will applaud what Fifa has become,” he said.

That is setting the bar really high. If that’s what he wants to be judged on, fine. He’ll get judged on that. If he turns the battleship, he will get a second term. If he doesn’t, well, at least we won’t be any worse off than we were with the previous regime.

NOSE bloodied, ancient demons creeping back, a fixture list from hell, starting with today’s trip to Old Trafford to take on a Manchester United coming off two outings in which they scored a combined eight goals and highlighted young talent.

This is where the Arsenal doom merchants will suggest the crumble is sure to begin. While they have to travel to United knowing they have scored just six in their past eight games, Tottenham have a relatively straight-forward home clash with Swansea, buoyed by a resounding Europa League victory.

It is no surprise that Arsene Wenger turned to the past for insp-iration, noting the fact that his three Premier League titles all came after dramatic wins at Old Trafford: from Marc Overmars’ late heroics in 1998, to Sylvain Wiltord’s winner in 2002, to the prickly game in 2004 which saw Ruud van Nistelrooy miss a penalty and Martin Keown confirm his freak-show credentials with his bizarre taunts of the Dutchman.

This is perhaps the most talented Arsenal side since the Invincibles and the title is within striking distance. Barcelona’s visit stung, but that has to be put to one side. While the goal drought looks worrying, they haven’t been lacking chances. The trick, as ever, is taking them.

Arsenal’s season may well rest on the next two away fixtures: today and Saturday’s at White Hart Lane. It is classic “stand up and be counted” time. Motivation should be the last of Wenger’s concerns.

Get this wrong and we will get a re-run of what we have seen the past few years. Speculation that Wenger has “lost it”, that the Gunners fold under pressure, that it’s time for new blood at the top.

This is Wenger’s line in the sand, make no mistake about it.