Elections speak to our human desire for progress and optimism. Not for no reason do we say change is as good as a holiday.
But FIFA should have been forced to introduce governance reforms via an independent body in lieu of a later election under a transparent system with greater representation from other stakeholders. Not themselves select what appears the best of a predominantly bad bunch to the presidency.
That the game was even prepared to elect the Bahraini Sheikh Salman with extremely serious concerns regarding alleged human rights abuses weighing heavily says everything. The Sheikh was the favourite, remember.
He is also president of the AFC that, like FIFA, has not seen fit to investigate Salman's role in his family's brutal response to pro-democracy protests in 2011. Yet we talk transparency and reform.
Despite the fact that Infantino is clearly a highly accomplished administrator, most optimism is principally for one reason, that Gianni Infantino is not Sheikh Salman. That is where we have arrived and, for now, must be placated by this fact.
But is that really good enough for the game?
Accepting that any reform being passed at FIFA is a positive step and that there is certainly greater hope than yesterday, there are aspects of concern regarding the appointment of Gianni Infantino.
He is a product of the system. He has prospered working under Michel Platini, now suspended for eight, er, six years for accepting several million dollars from Sepp Blatter nine years after it was allegedly promised and without a written contract. At a time of Blatter's election.
At no time has Infantino denounced the conduct of Blatter nor of Platini himself, lapsing instead into football speak about the contribution to the broader game.
Yes, but nothing about their contribution to the broader malaise, the broader corruption, the broader cultural disintegration.
Although an accomplished administrator Infantino very much, then, comes from within and the question whether he is prepared to hold those he has worked with and under to account, is an open one.
Nor did watching the coronation of the new king give any confidence that the culture of power will change. Following his acceptance speech, Infantino stood on the floor of the FIFA Congress as Member Federation constituents filed past, as they did with Sepp.
It would have been no surprise to see them bend knee and kiss the king's hand. They fell over themselves to embrace and kiss his grace, all the better to curry favour and influence, the most prized currency of the football world and if one needs to genuflect in full view of the cameras of the world, then so be it.
The king is dead, long live the king.
Thirdly, Infantino ran on a reform platform and, yet, did so by spending an extraordinary amount of football funds both now, and pledged in future.
Infantino bought his way to the throne. Worse still, he made no attempt to hide it and nor do many seem concerned.
Infantino simply flew around the world and paid the Member Federations off with the game's money. The candidates may have changed but the system has a long way to go.
Infantino also pledged to increase the World Cup from 32 to 40 to please smaller nations, this in a more packed playing calendar than ever before.
So Infantino has learnt from Blatter. And learnt very well.
Might he have considered the players' position in the grand scheme for ascension? And this remains itself a major issue, that the professional players of the world, the main actors on the football stage who are still traded like cattle in a financial system that is fundamentally flawed and rewards agents far more than the grass roots, still have no voice at the football table.
Undoubtedly, we have had so many negative football stories that the effect of the reform package being accepted has a disproportionately positive effect.
FFA were right to advertise their chosen candidate publicly to ensure not just Australian but all stakeholders understand the transparency we expect in our game and our own Moya Dodd, a former Matilda it should be remembered, played a pivotal role in progressing gender equality for which Moya has our thanks and pride, but we need much more.
We needed decision equality for the players and other stakeholders.
We needed independence. And we needed to avoid the same benefaction politics.
Sign up for our newsletter to stay up to date.