Why CAF Likely Ruled in Morocco’s Favor as Case Heads to Appeal Why CAF Likely Ruled in Morocco’s Favor as Case Heads to Appeal

Rabat – The controversy surrounding the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) final has taken a new turn as new analysis sheds light on why the Confederation of African Football awarded Morocco a 3-0 victory over Senegal on appeal.

While CAF announced its decision earlier this month, it did not publish a detailed explanation. This left room for debate, especially after the Senegalese Football Federation (FSF) officially challenged the ruling before the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

However, based on the available information and a close reading of CAF regulations, a clearer picture of the legal reasoning is beginning to emerge. That’s what a recent analysis by Medias24 shows. The report was based on both CAF’s announcement of the appeal and “unofficial insider information from the procedure.”

The case centers around a key moment during the final. After a VAR decision awarded Morocco a penalty late in the game, Senegal’s players left the pitch in protest for over 15 minutes. Although they returned afterwards and the match continued until the final whistle, this exit appears to have played a decisive role in the outcome.

According to CAF rules, specifically Article 82, a team that refuses to play or leaves the field before the end of a match without the referee’s permission is considered to be in grave violation of sporting rules of engagement. The rule does not clearly state that the departure must be permanent or that the match must be abandoned.

This is where CAF’s Appeal Board seems to have taken a strict approach, the analysis says. It argues that the likely reasoning is that the violation occurred the moment Senegal’s players walked off the field without authorization. From this perspective, it does not matter how long they were gone or whether they later returned to finish the game.

Senegal’s main argument is that the match resumed, and therefore the incident should not lead to such a heavy sanction. But CAF appears to have rejected this argument. The appeals body likely viewed the act of leaving the pitch as a completed violation that cannot be undone by returning later.

Another important point in the analysis is the difference between the referee’s role during the match and the authority of disciplinary bodies after the game. While the referee allowed play to continue, this does not prevent CAF from reviewing the situation afterward and applying sanctions based on the rules.

A strict reading — and application — of CAF regulations

The fact that Morocco continued to play the match is also not considered a sign that it accepted the situation, the analysis adds. Under this interpretation, Morocco did not give up its right to challenge what happened, even though the game went on.

In the end, the decision appears to rest on a strict reading of the regulations, with focus on the action itself rather than its consequences or context.

A separate report by Medias24 reviewed multiple converging official documents, including those reportedly from the referee, match commissioner, general coordinator, and security teams, on what unfolded on the final.

All these reports corroborated the same sequence of events: a walk-off, disruption, and heightened tension, including fans attempting to enter the pitch. Analysts, including Morocco World News co-founder Samir Bennis, note that the case is not about the refereeing decision itself but a clear regulatory breach under Article 82.

Morocco has the law on its side

Some people have urged me to temper my expectations about CAS, pointing out that Senegal has put together good pool of lawyer that are likely to tilt the proceedings to its favor.

To those who might be daunted by the presence of so-called world… pic.twitter.com/RddxKvlLdf

— Samir Bennis (@SamirBennis) March 27, 2026

CAF’s ruling is based on documented facts, and as the case moves to CAS, the consistency and clarity of the evidence supporting Morocco’s position will be key to any further review.

“CAS is likely to uphold CAF’s decision, as the wording of Article 82 leaves no room for interpretation or discretion. It is not for CAS to introduce distinctions where the law itself provides none,” Bennis said in a recent X post.

Now that Senegal has put the ball in its court, CAS will have to examine whether CAF applied its own rules correctly and consistently. To arrive at its much-anticipated verdict in what some conspiracy theorists are turning into another victimhood contest, the court will review the evidence and the legal reasoning behind the appeal decision.

And whichever side of this post-AFCON judicial battle its judgment winds up vindicating, CAS’s ruling in this case will definitely set an important precedent for handling similar incidents in the future. Not least because football has increasingly seen teams leave the pitch in protest, sometimes expecting to avoid serious consequences like Senegal did in Rabat on January 18.