The wait is finally over for the Senegalese Football Federation. After three weeks of uncertainty, the organization has officially received the reasoned decision from the CAF Appeal Jury. This document serves as the vital green light needed to escalate the dispute over the CAN 2025 final to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS).
Senegal intends to challenge the controversial ruling that awarded Morocco a 3-0 victory by forfeit. The arrival of this formal justification allows the legal process in Lausanne to begin in earnest, as the federation seeks to overturn the decision that stripped them of the title on administrative grounds.
CAF maintains Morocco victory but leaves trophy status unclear
In the documentation provided to both parties, the appeal jury reiterated its stance, confirming the 3-0 win for Morocco. However, the ruling stopped short of addressing the distribution of prize money, medals, or the physical trophy itself. According to the jury, these specific matters fall outside their legal jurisdiction.
Despite this ruling, the CAF Executive Committee has maintained a notable silence regarding the official winner of CAN 2025. This lack of formal communication has created a cloud of ambiguity surrounding the tournament’s outcome. The President of the Confederation has simply indicated that the final resolution now rests in the hands of the CAS.
No fixed timeline for the CAS final verdict
The saga of the CAN 2025 final, which concluded over two months ago, is nearing its judicial conclusion. The match was defined by chaotic scenes, including fan disturbances and the Senegal team’s decision to walk off the pitch. While the CAS has not yet established a definitive schedule for the hearings, its eventual ruling will be final and binding for both nations.
Matthieu Reeb, Director General of the CAS, commented on the upcoming proceedings, noting that the court is well-prepared to handle such high-stakes sports disputes. He emphasized that while the court understands the urgency felt by fans and teams to reach a conclusion, they will prioritize a fair trial that respects the rights of all involved parties.