TAS Reviews Senegal's Appeal Against CAF's Title Decision
The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) announced on Friday that it will review the appeal filed by the Senegalese Football Federation (FSF) on October 8 regarding the Confederation of African Football's (CAF) decision to award the title of the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations (AFCON) to Morocco. This appeal, which was registered by CAS on March 25, 2026, seeks to overturn the CAF's ruling that declared Senegal lost the AFCON 2025 final by default, thus granting Morocco a 3-0 victory.
According to the international body, the FSF is requesting that CAS officially recognize Senegal as the winner of the AFCON 2025 title. The situation dates back to January, when Senegal secured a tense 1-0 victory in a chaotic final match. Several Senegalese players left the field for approximately 15 minutes after the referee awarded a penalty to Morocco during stoppage time, although the Moroccan team subsequently failed to convert the penalty.
On March 17, the CAF appeals jury ruled that Senegal had "abandoned the field during the final," resulting in a 3-0 victory awarded to Morocco. CAS clarified in its statement that the parties involved have not reached an agreement to initiate an expedited process, which the FSF had requested when filing its appeal.
Consequently, the court is unable to specify when a decision will be made, emphasizing that it will not be announced on the same day as the hearing. Misleading information has circulated widely on social media, with posts claiming that CAS had issued a favorable ruling for Senegal, suggesting that the organization had "confirmed Senegal's victory" and reinstated their title as African champions. CAS has acknowledged the spread of misinformation regarding this process, reminding the public that only information released through official CAS channels is considered legitimate. Any announcements regarding this case will be published on the CAS website, as the organization confirmed to AFP that the alleged statement circulating was "false" and contained several significant procedural inconsistencies.
As reported by es-us.noticias.yahoo.com.
