Two months after the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations (Afcon) final, which was won by Senegal in January 2026, the appeal board of the Confederation of African Football (Caf) decided to strip them of the title and give it instead to their opponents, Morocco. This was because the Senegalese team had walked off the pitch for about 10 minutes.
Caf's ruling is based on Articles 82 and 84 of the African football body's regulations. It goes against the referee's decision to resume play and see the match through to its conclusion. What does sports law say on this matter? And what are the implications of the decision? We asked sports law specialist Abdoulaye Sakho for his opinion.
What is the legal basis for the decision?
The legal basis lies in Chapter 35 of the Africa Cup of Nations regulations, which covers team withdrawals, specifically Articles 82 and 84, which govern team withdrawal.
Follow us on WhatsApp | LinkedIn for the latest headlines
The Caf appeal panel decided that:
In application of Article 84 of the regulations of the Caf Africa Cup of Nations (Afcon), the Senegal national team is declared to have forfeited the final match.
The legal classification is a central issue. Some described Senegal's exit from the pitch as "match abandonment". The panel labelled it "withdrawal" as defined in the regulations.
Read more: Senegal stripped of title: Afcon ruling is lawful, but it puts Caf's reputation at risk
While similar tournament rules might refer to a "forfeiture of the match", the appeals panel adopts the concept of "withdrawal" as defined by the Afcon regulations. In law, and especially in sports law, this distinction is crucial. It determine which rules apply. Think of it as a medical diagnosis. Give the wrong one, and the treatment that follows may do more harm than good.
What was their reasoning?
It is difficult to speak with certainty about the panel's reasoning. However, we can assume that the Caf appeals board acted independently and exercised its full discretion as an autonomous body. It was within its rights to disregard a key factor: the match was played to completion.
Yet, I will admit that their reasoning remains puzzling to me. One thing is certain, the referee never stopped the match. Some Senegalese players left the pitch, then resumed play. He opted for a brief suspension, then resumed play. He did not declare the match over. That decision to resume the match is significant. Under law 5 of the International Football Association Board, the referee has
full authority to enforce the laws of the game ... stop, suspend or abandon the match for any offences or because of outside interference.
The regulations don't stipulate that there is a set time limit - such as 10, 15, or 20 minutes - after which a match must be abandoned. In this instance, the referee is the master of the game. He has made his decision, and that decision is binding on everyone, erga omnes (towards everyone) as legal purists would put it, because Law 5 is equally clear on this point:
The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play, including whether or not a goal is scored and the result of the match, are final. The decisions of the referee, and all other match officials, must always be respected.
Has there ever been a case like this at this level?
I am not aware of a similar case in an Afcon final. This is unprecedented at a continental final level. In football, authorities rarely overturn decisions on the pitch.
One exception was the South Africa vs Senegal match in the 2018 World Cup qualifiers. It was replayed after it was proven that the match referee, "bribed" by bettors, had made a decision that had an "illegal influence on the match result".
There are also well-known cases of suspended matches in the history of African soccer. One example is the 2019 Caf Champions League club final between Morocco's Wydad Casablanca and Tunisia's Espérance de Tunis. The Wydad players had refused to resume play after a disallowed goal. The referee also refused to consult the video assisted referee, because of a technical malfunction.
Read more: Afcon drama: what went wrong and what went right at the continent's biggest football cup in Morocco
Wydad never returned to play. After more than an hour of deliberation, the referee blew the final whistle, ruling that Wydad had forfeited the match. The final ruling in that case upheld that the refusal to resume play constituted a forfeit under the Caf disciplinary code, and the Moroccan team lost the match by default. The key difference is that in the 2025 Afcon final, Senegal did resume the match and played it to its conclusion.
What happens next?
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
It is well established in sports law that when a sports authority has rendered a final decision - as is the case of the decision by the Caf appeals board - the international Court of Arbitration for Sport may be approached to review the decision through an act called a "statement of appeal", with a filing fee of US$1,279.
Both sides submit written arguments, a hearing is held and then the court issues its ruling. Senegal's football federation has filed a request to the court to suspend the Caf decision. This will allow it to retain its title until the final court ruling, which is expected in a few months.
Read more: Can an African team win the World Cup? New football study crunches the numbers
This case is a textbook example for sports law because it raises several complex legal issues that cannot be fully addressed here, including the interpretation of sports regulations, the referee's authority over the game, the composition of judicial bodies, the issue of estoppel (ethics) in ongoing legal proceedings, and the governance of sports organisations.
Abdoulaye Sakho, Professeur de droit, Université Cheikh Anta Diop de Dakar
