CAN 2025: what went wrong for Senegal’s title loss?

Why did the CAF declare Senegal forfeited and award the title to Morocco?

The January 18, 2026 final saw Senegal triumph over hosts Morocco in a dramatic African Cup of Nations decider. Yet the tournament, particularly the final, was overshadowed by widespread concerns over refereeing and CAF governance, with allegations of bias favoring the host nation prompting the CAF to issue forceful denials about its commitment to fairness, transparency and strict regulatory compliance.

Inside the tense final, a series of controversial incidents unfolded. Senegal had a 92nd-minute goal disallowed for an alleged infringement. Morocco was then awarded a 98th-minute penalty following a penalty area incident, sparking protests from the Senegalese team, who refused to continue, left the field and retreated to the dressing rooms. The match was suspended for nearly 15 minutes. While Morocco missed the subsequent penalty, Senegal scored in extra time and secured the victory.

However, the team’s protest against the referee’s decisions was deemed incompatible with the CAF Nations Cup Regulations. Articles 82 and 84 state that if a team refuses to play or leaves the field without the referee’s permission, it will be declared forfeited and lose the match 3-0. The Moroccan Football Federation promptly filed a complaint with the CAF Disciplinary Board, which initially rejected the claim. Morocco then appealed to the CAF Appeals Board, which ruled on March 17, 2026 that Senegal had violated Article 82 by withdrawing from the match, declaring Senegal forfeited and awarding Morocco a 3-0 victory. Senegal has since appealed to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).

What legal grounds will guide the Court of Arbitration for Sport in this dispute?

Senegal’s CAS appeal falls under the CAF Statutes and the Sport Arbitration Code. Article 48.2 of the CAF Statutes states that when the CAS reviews a CAF Appeals Board decision, it applies CAF and FIFA rules first, with Swiss law as a subsidiary source. This approach was upheld in a prior case involving the South African Football Association (CAS 2020/A/6907), where the CAS applied the specific regulation in dispute.

In this instance, the CAF Appeals Board’s decision hinges on Articles 82 and 84 of the CAN Regulations. The CAS, in a March 25, 2026 statement, affirmed its readiness to resolve such disputes using specialized and independent arbitrators. The CAS may also consider Articles 9 & 16 of the FIFA Disciplinary Code or FIFA Laws of the Game, Law 5, which address the finality of referee decisions and the consequences of team behavior on match suspension. The CAS will assess whether the CAF Appeals Board’s interpretation aligns with the letter and spirit of these provisions.

What can we expect from Senegal’s appeal in the coming weeks?

Under CAF Statutes Article 48.7, a CAS appeal does not suspend the original decision—CAF rulings remain enforceable until the CAS issues its final verdict. Senegal’s appeal seeks to challenge the CAF Appeals Board’s decision on procedural and substantive grounds.

Procedurally, Senegal has raised concerns about the admissibility of its appeal, requesting an extension of the filing deadline until it receives the CAF’s reasoned decision. The dispute remains in its preliminary phase.

Substantively, Senegal’s appeal may focus on two key issues: the qualification of the team’s actions under Articles 82 and 84, and the balance between the referee’s authority (which is final) and the CAF’s disciplinary powers.

On the first point, the CAS must decide whether Senegal’s protest—temporary and contestatory—constitutes a refusal to play or abandonment under the regulations. Senegal will likely argue that the CAF Appeals Board overreached by equating a brief protest with a definitive forfeiture.

On the second point, Senegal may invoke FIFA principles asserting that the referee, not the CAF, is solely competent to determine whether a match should continue or be suspended in real time. Senegal could argue that retroactive reclassification as a forfeiture by the CAF Appeals Board undermines the immediate regulatory logic of the game and the legal certainty of the competition.

Ultimately, while Senegal’s appeal challenges the CAF Appeals Board’s interpretation of Articles 82 and 84 and its alignment with FIFA principles, the outcome remains uncertain and rests with the CAS’s discretion. Past CAS decisions have either overturned (CAS 2019/A/6483) or upheld (CAS 2020/A/6907) similar rulings. The CAS’s decision will be final.