The Africa Cup of Nations 2025 final between Morocco and Senegal was overshadowed by controversy, as a penalty decision led to Senegal's temporary walk-off and clashes with security. Legal experts warn of potential sanctions, with the Confederation of African Football (CAF) launching a disciplinary review into the incident. Illustrative photo / DR ‹ › The stakes ultimately overshadowed the game, as the highly contested Africa Cup of Nations final (AFCON 2025) between Morocco and Senegal (0–1) was marred by a series of incidents that eclipsed the match for long stretches. The turning point came when the central referee awarded a penalty to the Atlas Lions following a VAR review. The decision immediately sparked strong protests from the Lions of Teranga's bench, prompting head coach Pape Thiaw to instruct his players to leave the pitch. Tensions quickly escalated. Some Senegalese supporters attempted to storm the field and clashed with security personnel, while several Senegalese players headed toward the locker rooms, casting serious doubt over whether the match would continue. The game eventually resumed after the team returned to the field. Speaking to Yabiladi, Karim Adyel, a professor of sports law at the Academy of Leadership Sciences Switzerland (ALSS) in Zurich, described the episode as a «regulatory football imbroglio». Contacted by Yabiladi, Adyel, who is also a lawyer, a member of the International Association of Football Lawyers (AIAF) in Paris, and an arbitrator at the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS/TAS) in Lausanne, recalled that the Confederation of African Football (CAF) has opened a disciplinary review, noting that withdrawing from the pitch without the referee's authorization may «constitute a regulatory infraction». «If violations of the competition's regulations are confirmed, CAF may impose sanctions on the team or on individuals», he explained, citing possible penalties such as fines, suspensions, stadium bans, or even exclusion. CAF regulations, he added, «stipulate that a team which abandons the field without permission may be considered to have forfeited the match and eliminated». However, in the specific case of the AFCON 2025 final, «the fact that the Senegalese players returned to the field likely prevented the immediate application of such a sanction, although the matter may still be reviewed by the authorities». «The act is legally constituted» According to Karim Adyel, the key legal point remains unchanged. «Even if the team returns to the pitch, the act is legally constituted», he stressed. In other words, «the return does not erase the fault; it merely prevents the maximum sanction». Rather than an automatic forfeit, CAF could therefore impose «intermediate sanctions», including «a heavy fine, individual suspensions, an official warning, disciplinary monitoring, or deferred sanctions in the event of repeat offenses», the professor explained. Adyel also highlighted the existence of multiple «legal and disciplinary avenues, within African football (CAF), at the international level (FIFA and CAS), and potentially under Moroccan civil or criminal law, to challenge decisions, sanction misconduct, or seek reparations following the incidents of the final». He emphasized that «sporting appeals must be filed swiftly and in strict compliance with procedural requirements». If a team interrupts a match in protest over refereeing decisions during AFCON, continental regulations apply. Adyel pointed out that Article 82 of the CAF Disciplinary Regulations states that «any team that refuses to continue a match or leaves the field without the referee's authorization is deemed to have abandoned the match». In such cases, the regulations allow for forfeiture (3–0 or the score at the time of interruption), a heavy fine, exclusion from the competition, or suspensions of players and officials. Crucially, the text does not distinguish between motives: protest, he recalled, «is never a justifying factor». FIFA and international regulations Under FIFA regulations, Article 31 of the disciplinary code similarly provides that «a team which refuses to play or continue a match is sanctioned regardless of the reasons invoked». Possible sanctions include forfeiture, fines, exclusion from the competition, and disciplinary action against officials. The underlying principle, Adyel stressed, is that «disputes over refereeing decisions must be resolved through legal channels, never by force». As a final recourse, he explained, FIFA may be asked to assess whether CAF's decisions comply with international standards, including the Laws of the Game and disciplinary procedures. FIFA may also intervene through administrative arbitration or by validating CAF-imposed sanctions. These CAF provisions align with the principles set out by the International Football Association Board (IFAB). Law 12 states that leaving the field without the referee's permission may be sanctioned through warnings or expulsions, depending on the circumstances. While such actions do not automatically invalidate a match result, they «strengthen the disciplinary case against those involved», Adyel noted. Sporting appeals or formal protests may also be lodged within the prescribed deadlines, allowing a national federation to refer the matter to CAF in cases of «serious irregularities, whether related to refereeing, security, or the application of regulations». Pr Karim Adyel Finally, Adyel recalled that any CAF disciplinary decision may be challenged before the body's internal appeal mechanisms and, once those remedies are exhausted, before the Court of Arbitration for Sport in Lausanne. In conclusion, he underlined that «the law supports three clear principles: Senegal committed a characterized disciplinary infraction; the return to the pitch prevented forfeiture but not punishment; and any leniency shown by CAF must be justified by proportionality».
