Forbes applauds Morocco for world-class hosting of AFCON 2025

Forbes Africa has praised Morocco for delivering what it described as a world-class hosting of the 2025 Africa Cup of Nations, even as it revisited the controversy that marred the tournament’s dramatic final.

In its analysis, the publication highlighted the unforgettable climax on January 18, when Morocco faced Senegal in what it called a heavyweight showdown befitting a final. While the contest showcased moments of brilliance, the closing stages descended into chaos that continues to dominate post-tournament discussions.

“The match offered moments of class, but what ensued in stoppage time will be remembered for all the wrong reasons; eight minutes of added time became 3 minutes of jaw-dropping drama,” the report stated.

The publication recounted how the game took a shocking turn when Senegal players briefly walked off the pitch following encouragement from head coach Pape Thiaw, before eventually returning after intervention from captain Sadio Mane. Despite the disruption, Senegal went on to score a decisive goal in added time to win the match.

The fallout was immediate, with the Royal Moroccan Football Federation lodging a formal protest, citing the walk-off incident and its implications on the integrity of the game. The situation sparked widespread debate across the global football community.

The Confederation of African Football initially imposed sanctions on both sides, though criticism emerged suggesting the measures disproportionately affected Senegal, whose actions were seen as a breach of Articles 82 and 84 of the competition’s regulations.

Weeks later, on March 17, CAF’s Appeal Board delivered a decisive ruling, awarding the title to Morocco after determining that Senegal had effectively forfeited the match. The decision intensified tensions, with Senegal promptly escalating the matter to the Court of Arbitration for Sport.

Legal expert Zaeem Soofie noted that the case remains complex, pointing to Article 83, which requires a referee to formally document a team’s refusal to continue. According to him, that procedure may not have been properly followed during the final.

“What takes the matter from ‘questionable’ to ‘awkward’ is Morocco’s decision to continue and then appeal, but equally whether the referee erred in allowing the game to resume in the first place and whether his conduct lends itself to separate sanction from the result on the day,” he explained.

Morocco, however, remains resolute in its stance. Fouzi Lekjaa, president of the Moroccan federation, insists the country possesses clear evidence supporting CAF’s ruling and is ready to defend its position at the highest level.

“The withdrawal of the Senegal team is officially established,” he said, citing both the referee’s report and video footage of the incident.

Lekjaa also clarified Morocco’s decision to resume play after Senegal’s return, emphasising that refusing to continue could have exposed his team to disciplinary action.

“Morocco had to accept the resumption of the game,” he said. “Refusing to continue would have exposed us to the same sanctions under the regulations.”

Analyst Samir Bennis has echoed similar sentiments, arguing that the dispute hinges on a clear regulatory violation rather than subjective refereeing decisions. He maintains that Article 82 leaves little room for interpretation and expects CAS to uphold CAF’s verdict.

“CAS is likely to uphold CAF’s decision, as the wording of Article 82 leaves no room for interpretation or discretion. It is not for CAS to introduce distinctions where the law itself provides none,” Bennis stated.

He further stressed that the legal framework appears firmly in Morocco’s favour, suggesting Senegal’s arguments may struggle to overturn the ruling. According to him, the case ultimately rests on whether CAF correctly applied its regulations, which he believes it did.

As the dispute heads toward international arbitration, the legacy of an otherwise successfully organised AFCON in Morocco now remains intertwined with one of the most contentious finals in the tournament’s history.