The Court of Arbitration for Sport (TAS) is expected to issue its ruling on the disputed CAN 2025 final between Morocco and Senegal between 18 and 22 October, according to winwin.
The case concerns which country should be recognised as the tournament’s champion after the Confederation of African Football (CAF) overturned Senegal’s victory two months after the final and awarded the title to Morocco.
Representatives of Senegal, Morocco and CAF attended a closed hearing in Lausanne on Thursday. Their positions remain sharply opposed, with the panel now expected to deliberate before announcing its decision.
Morocco’s case is based on the strict application of Articles 82 and 84 of the CAN regulations. Those provisions formed the basis of CAF’s acceptance of Morocco’s appeal at second instance and the subsequent removal of the title from Senegal.
The Moroccan argument is that any team leaving the pitch must be sanctioned with a 3-0 walkover defeat and automatically disqualified. Morocco also highlighted the intervention of Olivier Safari, the president of the CAF referees’ commission.
Safari directly asked referee Jean-Jacques Ndala not to punish Senegal’s players, despite three of them being at risk of dismissal, according to the case presented by Morocco.
Senegal’s lawyers have instead relied on the authority granted to the referee under Article 5 of the International Football Association Board (IFAB) laws.
Their position is that the match restarted after the interruption and was completed, meaning the title could not subsequently be transferred to Morocco. The Lions of the Teranga have also challenged the CAF decision on procedural grounds, pointing to formal irregularities in the way the ruling was reached.
The dispute therefore centres on whether the regulations governing abandonment and disqualification should prevail, or whether the referee’s authority and the completion of the match prevent any change to the result.
Following Thursday’s hearing, the TAS arbitrators must now consider the arguments from all sides before delivering their judgment. The ruling is expected during the period from 18 to 22 October.
Until then, caution is required when assessing information about the case, given the contradictory accounts and the possibility that some versions may reflect the interests of the sources providing them.
