Follow Us on Google
By John Ogunsemore
Former Arbitrator at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS), Raymond Hack said he expects Senegal to succeed in their appeal to the body over their Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) 2025 title stripping.
On Tuesday night, the Confederation of African Football (CAF) announced its Appeal Board had stripped Senegal of the title won on January 18 and awarded it to Morocco, ending their 49-year wait for a second AFCON title.
CAF said the decision was in line with Article 84 of the AFCON regulations.
The West African nation was said to have infringed on article 82 of AFCON’s regulations, which stipulates that if a team refuses to play or leaves the ground before the end of regulation time without the refereee’s authorisation, it will be considered the loser and eliminated from the competition.
Article 84 states any team that violates Article 82 will be permanently eliminated and lose the match 3-0.
CAF said Senegal therefore forfeited the game by leaving the pitch for 10 minutes following the award of a controversial penalty to hosts Morocco, despite returning and winning the game 1-0 in extra time.
Other News
On Wednesday, the Senegalese Football Federation (FSF) said it was “an unfair, unprecedented and unacceptable decision which brings discredit to African football”.
It vowed to appeal the decision at CAS.
According to ESPN, Hack said the CAF Appeal Board decision was unjust.
He said that due to Morocco having failed to lodge a protest prior to the end of the game, and Congolese referee Jean-Jacques Ndala having kept the game going rather than stopping it, there was no basis for the Appeal Board siding with Morocco.
Asked if the Appeal Board had a basis for overturning the match result, Hack said, “No; not at all, because the referee is the final decision on the game and when he blows the whistle for the end of the game, that’s when the game ends.
“Yes, the team did go off, but they did come back on – and so did Morocco. When Morocco came on, nobody said: ‘We’re playing extra time under protest’ or anything. They played the 30 minutes – the 15 each way.
“Had they said: ‘We’re playing the extra time under protest,’ maybe they would have had something.”
